Saldate's testimony
at the Voluntariness Hearing

September 12th, 1990 was the day Debra Jean Milke's jury trial started in Phoenix, Arizona. Previous testimonies had commenced on September 10th, made by former Phoenix police detective ARMANDO SALDATE, who was also the first witness at the trial. This phase of the trial is called "Voluntariness Hearing" and was instrumental in the decision whether SALDATE'S police report including the alleged confession would be admissible as an item of evidence in this case. This page will summarize some of the key points of his testimony leading up to Judge HENDRIX' decision. The questionable report was eventually declared admissible by Judge CHERYL K. HENDRIX, one of many wrongheaded rulings she made during the trial.

As we read the transcripts of the trial proceedings, it also becomes apparent how defense attorney KENNETH RAY missed opportunities to effectively cross-examine SALDATE about many doubtful points in his story. Our comments and the lack of aggressive questioning by MR. RAY show that DETECTIVE SALDATE and prosecutor NOEL LEVY were given the opportunity to create a false picture of Debra Milke, which is not only horrible and made her appear a 'monster' in public, but ultimately also had a great deal of influence on the jury members [since the questionable report finally became admissible, therefore was 'the truth'].

September 10, 1990

Ken Ray: Do you have any experience or training, either on the job or through seminars, dealing with whether or not an individual can continue to be interrogated once they have invoked their right to remain silent?
Armando Saldate: Certainly. I understand that cannot happen.
Ken Ray: And can you say that you have abided by that rule on all occasions or interviews you have been involved in?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: You have not?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: And are there occasions where you would willfully violate that rule?
Armando Saldate: There are occasions that a person may ask for an attorney, I note it in my supplement, I note it in my notes; however, if that person continues to talk, I will continue to listen. And that has happened.
Ken Ray: Will you continue to ask questions?
Armando Saldate: If a question does come up in my mind during her conversation, or their conversation, sure, I will ask a question.

Comment: SALDATE'S conduct, as admitted here and in many other places, is an overt violation of constitutional rights - and illegal. But that is SALDATE'S version of following the rules - he will break the rules as convenient, but he promises to tell on himself. And the Arizona justice system let him continue this conduct over a 20-year career. Convictions were thrown out, criminals were freed, and - as in The Debra Jean Milke Case - innocent people were convicted. But SALDATE repeated his unlawful conduct again and again, and he was never made to stop [the despite the corroborated knowledge of his department about SALDATE'S tendency to even tie toward his superiors].

( ... )

Ken Ray: What facts did you have in your investigation up to that point, and that includes the investigation of the other officer that had briefed you, what facts did you have that suggested what Roger Scott had said up to that point was not the facts?
Armando Saldate: Facts, suspicions, maybe the fact of the matter that Scott had been telling officers that he had been taken home previously, that Jim Styers had gone to the Metro Center and that he, on his own volition, decided, I think, he would go back to Metro Center. And the strangest thing that happened, all of a sudden the child was missing. Mr. Styers is there claiming the child is missing. All of a sudden Mr. Scott appears. He didn't have a ride before now and was getting a ride with Mr. Styers. All of a sudden he appears in Metro Center. It was my belief through my experience, and solely through my experience, and my suspicions that Mr. Scott was there only for one reason. Mr. Scott was there to give Mr. Styers a little bit of backbone.

Comment: Isn't it strange that SALDATE claimed SCOTT had given STYERS 'a little bit of backbone', when in fact police at first alleged SCOTT was too dumb and simply not capable of planning the murder [only to confirm the 'conspiracy theory']? The true purpose and intention is clear: Police uncritically accepted ROGER SCOTT'S disjointed story, which minimized his own role, because it allowed them to 'solve' the case and implicate Debra and STYERS. But in fact, all indications suggest that a completely different scenario as the one told here took place. In the meantime another, far more likely version of events emerged. A co-inmate of ROGER SCOTT and JIM STYERS at the Madison Street Jail, a man named ROBERT E. JOHNSON, stated in an interview with County Attorney's Office investigator TOM BUCKNER, that both STYERS and SCOTT had told him, in separate conversations, that SCOTT had shot CHRIS. Thus SCOTT'S story implicating STYERS as the shooter was likely a lie meant to reduce his own responsibility. But SALDATE claimed he immediately believed SCOTT'S story in whole, a grievous mistake. And rather than investigating the truth, SALDATE later proceeded to interview Debra Milke - an interrogation he made sure took place with no witnesses or other objective evidence of what was said - and claim she had confessed. And LEVY accepted SALDATE'S unverified claim with no inquiry. From then on, SALDATE'S and LEVY'S project was to convict Debra, and the truth-seeking function of the judicial system was disregarded. "... Styers was still looking up at the sky then he heard a gunshot and he turned around and saw Roger with the gun and saw the little kid laying on the ground." Obviously, the entire story implicating Debra Milke and alleging there was a conspiracy is nothing but the fantasy of ARMANDO SALDATE and prosecutor NOEL LEVY.

Ken Ray: So, if I understand your testimony correctly, sir, you had no independent information that suggested that Mr. Scott was not telling you the truth, you just had a suspicion and an assumption on your part?
Armando Saldate: I had an assumption, I had suspicions. I also had the belief that, from my briefing with Detective Mills and briefing with officers who had talked to Scott, they had not afforded him the time or the method to be truthful, and that I was going to do.
Ken Ray: Are you suggesting that Detective Mills' interview with Mr. Scott did not afford Roger Scott the opportunity to tell the truth?
Armando Saldate: I'm saying Detective Mills' interview was, as I believe, and other detectives' interviews, were that of listening to Mr. Scott and were going to listen to him no matter what he said and were going to take down that information. I do it a little differently.

Comment: SALDATE is very proud of how he 'broke' the case, even though ROGERS SCOTT'S statement to him was almost as much of a self-serving lie as the stories SCOTT told the other detectives.

Ken Ray: Isn't it true that you have characterized your interview technique as basically listening 80 percent of the time and talking 10 percent of the time?
Armando Saldate: That only gives 90 percent of the time, so they -- well, basically. But what I did, Mr. Ray, is -- and I will tell you --
Ken Ray: Well, sir, is it true that is how you have characterized your interview style and technique?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: And haven't you just suggested that that is what Detective Mills did, was basically listened and gave Scott the opportunity to speak?
Armando Saldate: Well, I don't mean to argue with you, Mr. Ray, but the situation is that my technique and Detective Bob Mills' technique is a little different. My technique may be the same as another person's, I don't know, but still, I pursue an interview as straightforward as I can. Detective Bob Mills, my understanding was that he was listening to Roger Scott, was letting him talk, was not confronting him, was not challenging him in anything he said. I don't handle an interview that way.

( ... )

Ken Ray: At some point in time between approximately 2:00 o'clock and 3:00 o'clock on the afternoon of December 3rd, Roger Scott finally relented and spoke what you believed to be the truth?
Armando Saldate: Yes. I wouldn't use "finally relented". He finally decided to tell me what he felt was the truth, yes.
Ken Ray: And when he spoke to you he indicated that he knew where the body was at, is that right?
Armando Saldate: That is correct.
Ken Ray: And you and Detective Mills then made arrangements to proceed out to the location with Roger Scott; he was going to show you where the body was?
Armando Saldate: That is correct.
Ken Ray: Up to that point in time you are not -- now, prior to getting into the car with Roger Scott at 620 West Washington on the afternoon of December 3rd, 1989, he did not mention anything about Debra Milke, did he?
Armando Saldate: No.

Comment: In fact - as the examination of SALDATE'S report about the interrogation of ROGER SCOTT shows - the two men must have conversed for almost a full hour before SALDATE, DET. ROBERT MILLS and ROGER SCOTT entered the police car. Police reports of other detectives later established the point in time of the drive to the murder-scene as 4.30 to 5.00 p.m.

Ken Ray: While you were en route to what ultimately turned out to be 99th Avenue and approximately Happy Valley Road, Roger Scott and you and Detective Mills all had additional conversations, didn't you?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: You asked questions?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: Detective Mills asked questions?
Armando Saldate: Some.

Comment: This is a very interesting point. Here SALDATE admits that DET. MILLS also had a part in the conversation between the three men. Yet, as the supplemental report of DET. MILLS shows, the detective does not mention an additional incrimination therein. Just picture the situation: You are driving a car, and a suspect incriminates another individual with murder, and you listen to these statements ... how likely is it that you don't mention this incident in a police report?

Ken Ray: And Roger Scott was asking questions of you detectives?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Ken Ray: And he was still under the protection of the Miranda warnings, wasn't he?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Ken Ray: And during the course of the conversations en route to 99th Avenue and Happy Valley Road, it was only then that Roger Scott suggested that Debra Milke was involved?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Ken Ray: And that shocked you, didn't it, sir?
Armando Saldate: Shocked me?
Ken Ray: Yes, because up to that point you had no idea or even suspicion that she was involved. Yes?
Armando Saldate: It didn't shock me. There's not very many things that shock me nowadays, but the situation with that interview in the car -- and if I can explain briefly, I'm sure Roger would have told me all that information in the interview room had we continued our interview. However, the interview was continued in the car because it was felt that, because of darkness coming, it was necessary to take Mr. Scott out there to find the body as quickly as possible. That's why the interview was terminated inside the interview room and then extended into the car. That was not my idea, wouldn't have been my idea.

Discrepancy #1: SALDATE'S version sounds good in the court room, but it is at odds with his own report. In that report SALDATE narrated that - after SCOTT had confessed "JIM killed him" [CHRISTOPHER MILKE] - SCOTT elaborated on various preceding visits to possible crime scenes, SCOTT and STYERS' actions at the Metro Center, how the killing allegedly took place, how SCOTT drove back and forth with the car while STYERS and CHRISTOPHER were in that desert area ... he also expressed concern about the trouble that was ahead of him and explained how he was dependent on the $250 offered by STYERS. During all of this there is no mention of any involvement of Debra Milke at all. With his testimony SALDATE also twisted the content of his report, where it says: "Just after leaving the main station, ROGER said if he could tell us some more while he was in the car or would we rather wait until we returned and I suggested that he go ahead and tell us. ROGER then said that we probably felt that he and JIM were the only bad ones in this situation but that he was going to tell us something about the baby's mother, ROGER went on and said that the baby's mother knew all about the killing and in fact the only reason that CHRIS was killed was because the mother wanted it done." SALDATE'S testimony conflicts substantially with his own written report. According to that report, the interview of SCOTT was not being continued as they drove; instead, SCOTT - clearly starting to worry about how he had just admitted to murder - started to ramble on and suggest a role for Debra. Now SALDATE smoothes this out by altering details in his testimony, saying that SCOTT'S statements were simply the result of a continuation of the interview as they drove out to Happy Valley Road. But KEN RAY did not notice this 'improvement' in SALDATE'S story, and did not challenge him about it and continued his cross-examination ...

Ken Ray: In the car, though, you never asked the question, "Is Debra Milke involved in this", did you?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: And the reason you didn't ask that question is because you had no facts, no suggestion and no suspicion that Debra Milke was involved at all, did you?
Armando Saldate: I can't say about suspicion, no.
Ken Ray: Okay. You would agree there were no facts?
Armando Saldate: There were no facts, no.
Ken Ray: All right. And as this statement came out of Roger Scott suggesting that Debra was involved, it was not pursued to any great length with him in that car, was it?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: It was just accepted sort of, "Yeah, Debra is involved, fine", right?
Armando Saldate: Again, it's hard to interview someone when you are driving down the street.
Ken Ray: Who was driving?
Armando Saldate: Bob Mills. That's why I'm saying it's hard. It's hard to -- you know, this interview would never have been taken out of the office had it been left to me. But I'm not foolish, I'm just a detective. I have superiors. They make up their decisions and, of course, I have to follow them.

Discrepancy #2: SALDATE contradicts himself with this testimony. Unfortunately KEN RAY didn't work that out in greater detail. At first SALDATE claimed it was "hard to interview someone when you are driving down the street", next he confirmed that BOB MILLS had driven the car. Therefore it would have been easy for the former police officer to pursue the interview in greater length with ROGER SCOTT and examine whether the accusations of Debra Milke were reasonable. Despite this possibility, SALDATE chose to evade the question, denied being foolish and points to his superiors, claiming he didn't have any responsibility in taking ROGER SCOTT out to the murder-scene. What is glossed over here, and not brought out by KEN RAY, is how completely SALDATE accepted SCOTT'S self-serving story with no serious questioning. By the time SCOTT was incoherently trying to tell his story in a taped interview with DET. MILLS, SALDATE was already in Florence, where he was framing Debra Milke. By the time of the voluntariness hearing, RAY had seen the report in which ROBERT E. JOHNSON had implicated SCOTT as the shooter; he should have been able to question SALDATE more closely about how false SCOTT'S story was.

Ken Ray: Did a superior tell you, "Break this interview off now, you are going out with Roger Scott and find the body"?
Armando Saldate: My superiors told me that "You will have to take Roger Scott out there and continue the interview later, take him out there and find the body".

Comment: If that were true, why does SALDATE'S report not contain any mention of a superior's order? Why does the report not contain any mention of fear of darkness?

They were afraid, because of darkness, maybe Roger Scott did not know where actually the body was. And having some experience on the homicide detail myself, including having some experience taking people out where a body should be, doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be. So it takes some time to search. And having that experience and my supervisors basing that experience for their decision, told me to terminate the interview, "Let's take him out and find the body, come back and continue your interview". That was not my wish, but that's what I did.
Ken Ray: Your experience, talking about the experience that you have just mentioned, is that as you take somebody out who is going to show you where the scene of a crime has supposedly occurred, you know before you get out that that may not be the right location or the body may not be there, et cetera, et cetera, is that right?
Armando Saldate: Certainly.
Ken Ray: That means that the individual who has told you all the details of the crime may still be lying to you, isn't that right?
Armando Saldate: No. I know that, due to the fact that a murder had taken place of a child, due to the fact that this person who I was talking to, Mr. Scott, didn't feel glad about it, wasn't happy about it, didn't feel proud about it, didn't want it told to everyone, he obviously felt bad about the situation, and for that reason may not know the exact location of where that body was found -- or where that body was left. And in his own interview with us he said that he only knew the general location. For that reason, that's why I, as a detective, relayed the information and my supervisors made that decision, not me.

Comment: Again, it is clear just how completely SALDATE accepted SCOTT'S self-serving story of his "unwilling" participation in the killing of CHRISTOPHER MILKE. It never occurred to SALDATE that the story he got out of ROGER SCOTT was almost as much of a lie as the tales that the other detectives had gotten from SCOTT.

Ken Ray: Isn't it true, sir, that as you proceeded with Roger Scott out to 99th and Happy Valley Road, there was no fact of a murder, was there? There was only a statement of Roger Scott?
Armando Saldate: We didn't have the body, no. We had a missing child, though.

Comment: SALDATE chose to evade the question by talking about the body and the "Missing person report". MR. RAY'S question pointed to the fact that there was no other indication of Debra Milke's involvement, other than ROGER SCOTT'S rambling statements.

Ken Ray: I take it that you base a lot of your decisions on whether an individual is telling the truth based upon how they respond to questions. Is that fair?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: Just a moment ago you were describing emotions basically of Roger Scott, isn't that true?
Armando Saldate: That's true, but you are asking about the truth. I can't tell you. I can't sit here, Mr. Ray, just like I can't tell Bob Mills, I can't -- I taught at the academy four-and-a-half years. I can't sit in front of my students and tell them how I complete an interview and how can I believe Debra when she is telling me something and tell that person, tell Bob Mills the way to do it, because I don't know. There's interaction between two people that's occurring. There was interaction between me and Roger Scott. He told me something. I knew I was truthful with him, he was truthful with me. I can't tell you how I did it.

Comment: Another evasive statement to escape KEN RAY'S efforts to disclose SALDATE'S pattern; SALDATE was unable to tell how the reaction of a suspect led him properly to a certain suspicion. And SALDATE is clearly proud of how he got the "truth" out of SCOTT - even though almost everything SCOTT told him other than the location of CHRIS' body was a lie.

Ken Ray: In this particular case when you had an occasion to interview Debra Milke, you have stated in your report that she feigned crying and feigned hysterics, isn't that right?
Armando Saldate: From the entire report, that's obviously true.
Ken Ray: That's in your report?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: And I take it, then, that you, because you concluded that she was feigning hysterics and feigning crying, she obviously was lying, is that right?
Armando Saldate: From reading the entire supplemental, it's obvious, yes.
Ken Ray: Sir, I'm asking for -- you are the writer of that supplemental report, are you not?
Did you write the supplemental report, sir?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I did.

Comment: ... which is very interesting, because the two reports (the one about his interrogation of ROGER SCOTT and the one about Debra) were written chronologically twisted. According to the pertinent police records SCOTT was examined from 1.52 p.m. until approximately 5 p.m.; Debra's interrogation took place at 7.55 p.m. on that December 3, 1989. The report about his interview of Debra was written three days later, on December 6, 1989 at 8.40 a.m.; the report about ROGER SCOTT was written later the same day, at 1.57 p.m. Every person dealing with office affairs and paperwork would question this order of the supplements. Unfortunately Mr. Ray was not aware of this sequence.

Ken Ray: Did you witness what you ultimately then wrote in the report?
Armando Saldate: Sure.
Ken Ray: Okay. Put the report aside. I'm just asking, sir, if you are the one who witnessed these things and did you witness her feigning crying.
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: And that's what you put, then, in the report?
Armando Saldate: Correct.

Comment: Okay, let's summarize what we know about the allegation of "feigning crying". Could it be people have a different physical ability to shed tears? Could it be people have a different way of expressing their grief? Could it be the shock about the news of her murdered son hindered Debra from crying? No experts on these issues have ever been called to the stand. But - as we have heard from Debra herself - could it be she actually cried and SALDATE had solely made this story about "feigning crying" up?

Ken Ray: And based upon this, what you perceived to be feigning and hysterical conduct on her part, she was therefore lying, is that right?
Armando Saldate: That is correct.
Ken Ray: All right. Do you believe people who feign emotions lie?
Armando Saldate: In general I can't say that.
Ken Ray: How about specifically?
Armando Saldate: Specifically in this case? Yes.
Ken Ray: Specifically in this case, when feigning.
Armando Saldate: Specifically in this case is all I can tell you, and that's correct.
Ken Ray: How do you know, sir, that she was feigning? Do you have a degree in perception of psychology or anything?
Armando Saldate: I have -- and again, by experience only -- again, 21 years of police work. I don't claim to know all, see all, but I also have two daughters and have also been married for over 20 years. When someone is told that their child was murdered and they start to sob and no tears come to their eyes, it's obviously a way for her to try to make me feel for her, and I didn't buy it. I didn't buy it, Mr. Ray, just didn't buy it.

Comment: But, in the end, the fact is that SALDATE was unable to tell the Court how he knew that Debra Milke was lying, just asserting it was from "experience" - the same experience that led him to accept SCOTT'S self-serving lies. And, in truth, Debra was not lying - she was in shock at being harshly told of her child's murder. But SALDATE, assuming her guilt from SCOTT'S lies, was looking to implicate her - in fact, to frame her. SALDATE'S willingness to violate rules and fairness in order to get those he decided were guilty are shown by his deplorable record of misconduct as a police officer. But in Arizona, the media simply repeated SALDATE'S claims as if this dishonest police officer were in possession of the "ultimate truth", and the general public simply believed this. But the many discrepancies, twisted statements, lies. and allegations uncovered against SALDATE show that this was a highly questionable thing to accept.

Ken Ray: From what facts do you conclude that she was feigning?
Armando Saldate: Again, the statement of Roger telling me what happened, the fact that I went there, when I went into the room I told her what had happened, she never -- her eyes never teared. After I told her she was under arrest, all of a sudden she is more concerned about what would happen to her than the fact about her son being found. And again, just 21 years of experience, Mr. Ray.

Comment: The repeated mention of his 21 years of experience tends to intimidate the examiner. But there is certainly no reason for SALDATE to be proud of his record as a police officer. His history of coercing confessions, of fabricating statements in this and in other cases, and of other forms of illegal behavior was already suspicious. Unfortunately the Arizona legal and police system appears to support such behavior. But again, SALDATE'S reply was nothing but an evasion of the initial question. SALDATE didn't elaborate how he came to the conclusion Debra was feigning her hysterical behavior. He was unable to state any coherent thought he had pertaining to that situation.

Ken Ray: So those three facts plus 21 years' experience enables you to conclude what is true and what is untrue, is that correct?
Armando Saldate: In this case?
Ken Ray: In any case.
Armando Saldate: No, I can't say any case, Mr. Ray. In this case, yes.
Ken Ray: All right. And you were able to conclude that the emotions exhibited were not genuine, but rather ingenuine?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: And you have had no college or postgraduate courses in psychology or psychiatry?
Armando Saldate: I'm sorry, I did not.

Ken Ray: Constable Saldate, after Roger Scott made the statement to you during the course of his interview suggesting that he knew where the body of Christopher Milke was, you and Detective Mills proceeded to the location at his direction, is that correct?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Ken Ray: What time approximately did you arrive at that location?
Armando Saldate: I would have to refer to my report.
Ken Ray: All right. Late afternoon, say, just before sundown?
Armando Saldate: Yeah, late afternoon.
Ken Ray: All right. And how long, can you tell us approximately, that you remained at the location of 99th and Happy Valley Road?
Armando Saldate: Twenty or 30 minutes, maybe, at the most.
Ken Ray: During the time you were there, Roger Scott remained in the car, isn't that true?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: And I believe you previously testified that in the conversations that you had with Roger Scott en route to the scene he made mention of Debra Milke, but you didn't engage in any follow-up in terms of questions or interrogation on that point, is that correct?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: All right. En route back to the Police Department from 99th and Happy Valley Road, did you ride with Roger Scott?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Ken Ray: Was Detective Mills with you at that time?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Ken Ray: And at approximately, if you know, what time did you arrive back at 620 West Washington?
Armando Saldate: Another 30 or 40 minutes later.
Ken Ray: All right. Did you have any further follow-up conversation with Roger Scott concerning Debra Milke?
Armando Saldate: There was some, I believe.

Comment: "There was some" and "I believe" are the answers of a leading case agent in a high profile case? In fact Det. MILLS asked ROGER SCOTT some leading questions in order to find out about the true position of Debra Milke in the alleged conspiracy, but SCOTT endlessly contradicted himself. The rambling and conflicting statements were so incoherent that SALDATE was unable to repeat any of SCOTT'S statements in the court room.

Ken Ray: In total how many questions and answers would you say concerning that subject was exchanged?
Armando Saldate: There weren't very many questions. It was more of a narrative, a history, telling us about the situation. Some questions, but very little.
Ken Ray: All right. And is it true, sir, that but for what Roger Scott told you in the car both going to 99th Avenue and coming back from 99th Avenue that you had no facts to suggest that Debra Milke was in any way involved, correct?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: All right. You believed that Roger Scott's statement in the car was true?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Ken Ray: But you had no facts to support whether it was true or false, did you?
Armando Saldate: That's false.

Comment: ... it's getting interesting at this point ...

Ken Ray: What facts did you have at the time Roger Scott told you of Debra's involvement?
Armando Saldate: Oh, about Debra's involvement. I thought you said a statement.

Comment: SALDATE tried to make a detour in order to evade that question again, but Mr. Ray insisted on a direct response to it ...

Ken Ray: Yes.
Armando Saldate: The entire statement --
Ken Ray: What facts did you have -- let me finish the question so we don't step on each other. What facts did you have to support Roger Scott's statement that Debra was involved at the time he made that statement?
Armando Saldate: None.

Comment: Now it is established that SALDATE had no facts to suspect Debra Milke other than SCOTT's statements, which were contradictory and incoherent. In fact, considering the interview of Robert Johnson, almost all of SCOTT'S statements are seen to be self-serving lies.

Ken Ray: And it was an assumption on your part that what Roger Scott was telling you in connection with Debra's involvement was true?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: All right. Did you direct other officers to drive ahead to Florence to arrange for Debra Milke to be brought to the Pinal County Sheriff's Office?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: Detective Ontiveros was your supervisor?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: Did you have a conversation with Detective Ontiveros either at the scene or back at the station house after the body had been found?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: In that conversation was one of the subjects discussed whether or not you, Detective Saldate, would go to Pinal County and speak with Debra?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: Were you instructed by Detective Ontiveros, your supervisor, to proceed to Pinal County and interview Debra?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: Were you instructed also by Detective Ontiveros to conduct a tape-recorded interview of Debra Milke?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: Other officers did proceed to Pinal County in advance of you, isn't that true?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: And to your knowledge those other officers got in contact with the Pinal County Sheriff's Office to arrange for Debra Milke to come down to the Pinal County' Sheriff's Office?
Armando Saldate: I believe that's what happened.
Ken Ray: All right. Did you have any conversations with those lead officers before you drove down?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: Had Detective Ontiveros instructed that you arrest Debra Milke?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: Had you related to any other officer that it was your intention to go down to Pinal County to arrest Debra Milke?
Armando Saldate: I had not talked to anybody.
Ken Ray: Did you have in your mind as you departed Phoenix for Florence to arrest Debra Milke?
Armando Saldate: I can't really say I had set my mind, but it was there. I was thinking about it.

Discrepancy #3: Here we catch SALDATE with a bold-faced lie. He cautiously slips Mr. Ray's question "Had you related to any other officer that it was your intention to go down to Pinal County to arrest Debra Milke?" by responding "I had not talked to anybody." Previously he had testified that his superior, SGT. ONTIVEROS had not given the order to arrest Debra Milke. But the reports of DET. HAMRICK and DET. DiMODICA prove that the intention to arrest Debra was pre-concluded. Therefore SALDATE must have lied to Ray with this reply.

Ken Ray: Did you have any facts to support -- other than Roger Scott's statement, any facts to support an arrest of Debra Milke?
Armando Saldate: Other than Roger Scott's statement, no.
Ken Ray: Okay. You did not drive to Pinal County; rather, you took a helicopter, is that correct?
Armando Saldate: That is correct.
Ken Ray: All right. When you boarded that helicopter did you have any paperwork with you?
Armando Saldate: I may have. I'm sure I had my notebook with me.

Comment: Again, this is how SALDATE tried to evade questions in the court room.

Ken Ray: Did you have a tape recorder with you?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: May I ask how it was that you were going-to be able to comply with your supervisor, to Detective Ontiveros' instructions that you conduct a tape-recorded interview if you didn't have a tape recorder?
Armando Saldate: First of all, it was a suggestion by him, not an order. Secondly, of course, I don't own a tape recorder, but Police Departments have tape recorders.
I was going to a Police Department, Pinal County Sheriff's Office. I could have very easily borrowed one there.
Ken Ray: Did you call ahead to find out if indeed the Pinal County Sheriff's Office had a tape recorder?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: And you had a tape recorder that you could have taken that was in your office, did you?
Armando Saldate: I don't have one. I did not own any tape recorder.
Ken Ray: How much trouble would it have been, sir, to have picked one up before you left 620 West Washington?
Armando Saldate: I don't know. I don't own one, didn't use one.
Ken Ray: And is it fair to say you just never use a tape recorder?
Armando Saldate: I would never say never.
Ken Ray: Okay. But it's your habit and custom when conducting interviews not to record them, is that correct?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.

Comment: SALDATE'S long history of misconduct and false statements give a very good idea of why he doesn't like to tape-record his interviews.

Ken Ray: You arrived at the Pinal County Sheriff's Department at approximately five, six, seven minutes until 8:00 that evening, correct?
Armando Saldate: If you are reading off my supplemental report, yes.
Ken Ray: When you arrived, were you aware that Debra was as the Pinal County Sheriff's Office?
Armando Saldate: I was aware she was going to be there. And obviously, when I arrived, I contacted the personnel there and was told that.

Comment: If Debra was indeed involved in any conspiracy to have her 4-year-old son CHRISTOPHER killed, why would she not take refuge after she was confronted with the name of ROGER SCOTT at noon that December 3, 1989? Instead of doing that she would accompany her step-mother and step-sister down to Florence, stay there, go to the Pinal County Sheriff's Office, arrive there at 4.50 p.m. and wait for Detective SALDATE'S arrival and making contact with him at 7.50 p.m.??? That does not make sense at all.

Ken Ray: And were you advised as to where she was located within the complex at the Pinal County Sheriff's Department?
Armando Saldate: I think the last room in the back, kind of like a nursing area. I'm not sure, you know, if it was used for a sick bay.

( ... )

Ken Ray: And tell the Court what you immediately said after identifying yourself as a Phoenix Police detective, Detective Saldate.
Armando Saldate: I told her what I was investigating.

Comment: At this point in his examination MR. RAY tried to get SALDATE to admit that he had arrested Debra solely on the rambling incrimination of ROGER SCOTT, and that she was informed of her arrest from the very first minute SALDATE entered the room. It's interesting to observe how the former police detective tried to evade those questions of the defense attorney.

Ken Ray: State the specific words, if you would, please.
Armando Saldate: I know I told her I was investigating her son's disappearance.

Comment: Okay, that may have been the introductory statement, but SALDATE gave no further comments as far as the factual information. Mr. Ray needed to ask a second time ...

Ken Ray: What else?
Armando Saldate: After that I told her that we needed to know what was going on and told her her son had been found dead.

Comment: Again, SALDATE gave no plausible statement but noticed what Mr. Ray was going to examine him about. Ray wanted to know what happened, but for the first time - in his second answer - the truth about the actula talk with Debra leaked out : "... her son had been found dead."

Ken Ray: And she responded?
Armando Saldate: She -- I told her her son had been found dead or had been shot to death or something like that.

Comment: SALDATE evaded the question "And she responded?" because he knew, this way his story would not lead to a believable picture of the situation. In his fourth answer about this matter he continued to admit that he had indeed stated : "... her son had been found dead ... shot ..."

Ken Ray: You prepared a supplemental report, did you not?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.

Comment: Mr. Ray noticed SALDATE'S incoherent statements with four answers so far and came from another direction, challenging him about the content of his initial police report.

Ken Ray: Concerning the statements that you made to her?
Armando Saldate: Certainly.

Comment: In his sixth answer SALDATE becomes rather terse ...

Ken Ray: And you reviewed that report today?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I have.
Ken Ray: And does it not say in your report, "Approximately 1953 hours I explained to Debra her son Chris had been found in a desert area and that he had been found shot to death"? Is that what you told her?
Armando Saldate: That's correct. I didn't memorize it, I just reviewed the report.

Comment: In his answer no. 8 SALDATE became sullen when confronted with the fact that his story in court didn't match his report. He felt it's unfair to have to tell a consistent story. All of a sudden it was "his memory", despite the fact that he has reviewed his report on the same day.

Ken Ray: All right. Is it true that that was essentially the very first statement, short of introducing yourself, that you gave to Debra Milke?
Armando Saldate: No.
Ken Ray: What other statements did you tell her before you advised her of the condition of her son?
Armando Saldate: I believe my supplemental says that I went in, introduced myself, explained to her what I was working on, and we were working on the disappearance of her son.

Comment: Answer no. 10, and still we don't hear the entire truth. SALDATE escaped again, telling Mr. Ray an embellished story of what had happened in that room and hoped the defense lawyer will leave it at that.

Ken Ray: And she asked you, did she not, if you had any news concerning the disappearance of her son?
Armando Saldate: I don't believe so.
Ken Ray: Is it your testimony she just sat there mute and said nothing in response to that?
Armando Saldate: I don't think she said anything in response to that. Then I went into the statement you just read.

Discrepancy #4: She didn't say anything in response? In his report SALDATE wrote : "DEBRA immediately began to yell 'what, what'." As we can see, SALDATE twisted the proceedings in his testimony completely.

Ken Ray: You continued to state that she was also under arrest for the death of her son, did you not?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.

Comment: Finally! It took SALDATE thirteen efforts to eventually admit - still disconnected and incoherent - that his words indeed were : "We found your son, he was murdered, and you are under arrest". These were his first words to Debra, without any evidence against her, other than SCOTT'S confused and unexamined incrimination to suspect that she had a part in the murder of her son.

Ken Ray: At which time you described in your report that some rather strange noises and statements, "What, what", was emanating from Debra Milke. Is that true?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: You then proceeded to immediately read her her rights, according to your report, is that correct?
Armando Saldate: Shortly thereafter, yes.
Ken Ray: And you have described Debra's conduct at that time as being hysterical?
Armando Saldate: I don't think I said hysterical.
Ken Ray: Would you characterize her as that she was crying?
Armando Saldate: She was trying to cry. Ken Ray: Did you state in your report that : "Debra immediately began to yell, 'What, what'. She then started to scream and make noises as if she was crying, but no tears were visible. I then explained to her I would not tolerate her crying. She was also under arrest for the death of her son"?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: Is that precisely what you told her?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: And you have testified earlier that you, believed that this show of emotion that you believed that this show of emotion that was just discussed was feigned emotion?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: But that's just an assumption on your part, is it not, sir?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Ken Ray: You then -- in telling her you were not going to tolerate her crying, what were you trying to accomplish, sir?
Armando Saldate: I was trying to accomplish the end result, that me and her were going to sit down and we were going to talk about it.
Ken Ray: Was your end result also that she was going to tell you the truth?
Armando Saldate: Sure.
Ken Ray: Okay. You asked her if you could record this conversation, is that right?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: Now, at the time that you entered that room you did not have a recorder with you, did you?
Armando Saldate: No, I did not.
Ken Ray: You had not inquired as to whether or not there was a recorder available to you at the Pinal County Sheriff's Office?
Armando Saldate: I'm sure there was, but no, I had not.
Ken Ray: Isn't it true, sir, that you had every intention in the world of not recording that conversation?
Armando Saldate: I had been asked by my supervisor to record it. If it was up to me, that decision left up to me, I would have not recorded it.
Ken Ray: And you chose --
Armando Saldate: I wouldn't even have asked the question.

Discrepancy #5: SALDATE contradicts himself at this point, as we will see in this part of the examination. Here he says "I wouldn't even have asked the question." His next sentence will be "She said she didn't want it recorded." Is it a coincidence that his real intention and her alleged statement [that she didn't want it recorded] matches? Or was it rather his wish, his action that caused this interview not being recorded?

Ken Ray: You chose not to record it, isn't that true, sir?
Armando Saldate: She said she didn't want it recorded.
Ken Ray: Didn't she say before she didn't want it recorded she wanted a lawyer?
Armando Saldate: Absolutely not.

Comment: SALDATE'S statements about his dislike of using a tape recorder to verify his account of an interview and his policy of repeatedly ignoring suspects' constitutional rights give strong support for Debra's testimony about this episode : Debra Milke: ... he said, "Do you want this interview recorded?" And I looked up at him and I said, "No, I need a lawyer". And then after I said that, he moved his chair directly in front of me. Ken Ray: How close to you? Debra Milke: Right in front of me. I mean right in front of me. Ken Ray: And next? Debra Milke: He asked me - I was still crying throughout this time and he asked me, after I told him I didn't want it recorded because I wanted a lawyer, he asked me how old I was. I told him I was 25. And he said, "I have a daughter your age, so I understand how you feel". He put his hands on my knees and told me I could trust him, that he was my friend and that he was there to find out what happened. And he kept - repeatedly told me, "You can trust me, Debbie, I'm your friend, I'm here to help you."

Ken Ray: Others that you have investigated have said they wanted lawyers, isn't that right, sir?
Armando Saldate: I'm sure they have.
Ken Ray: And you have continued to interrogate them, isn't that true?
Armando Saldate: And I have put that on the report.
Ken Ray: Have you put it on the report each and every time you violated their right to counsel?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I have.

Comment: Again - this is shocking, but true. SALDATE admits that his standard operating procedure is to ignore a suspect's constitutional right to an attorney. This is okay, SALDATE says, because he claims to always self-report his illegal conduct. And he has been doing this for years, apparently with the blessing of the Arizona justice system, for he has never been made to stop this prohibited behavior. Small wonder that SALDATE thought that he could fabricate a confession to implicate Debra Milke when no credible evidence existed of her involvement in the death of her son.

Ken Ray: You told her that her son had been found in the desert shot to death and she was under arrest for this murder and you chose not to record the interview that you were going to conduct with her, is that correct?
Armando Saldate: She chose not to record the interview.
Ken Ray: Did she tell you that she had never been in trouble before?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: Was that early on in the interview?
Armando Saldate: Toward the end.
Ken Ray: Toward the end of the interview?
Armando Saldate: Middle to end.
Ken Ray: You indicate in your report that the conversation that ensued between you and Debra started when she was in high school.
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: Is it your testimony that none of her questions to you had to do with the facts concerning the disappearance of her son?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Ken Ray: No asking, no questions whatsoever?
Armando Saldate: That is correct.

( ... )

Ken Ray: When you have an individual who has been arrested for first degree murder, it's customary that they be transported without handcuffs?
Armando Saldate: It's customary for the officer who has made the arrest, or officer who has 21 years of experience, to make that decision.

Comment: Interesting, especially since Detective SALDATE chose not to handcuff Debra after he had told her she was under arrest and both individuals exited the interview room in the Pinal County Sheriff's Office in Florence. This way no one of the present individuals at the jail facility would know about the alleged confession and the unfounded arrest and no one could ask Debra about the "confession" she had supposedly just made. Every action SALDATE took was designed to create a scenario in which it is his word against Debra's - this is a detective purposefully avoiding the collection of supporting evidence. If she had really confessed, why would he not do something to put the confession in a verifiable form - get a signed confession, have Debra repeat the confession in front of witnesses. Instead a private, not-witnessed interview is followed by secretive arrest procedures. Plus - looking at the parallel report of Detective H.E. Hamrick about these circumstances - Debra's acquaintance JANET FROEBE had already heard that "DEBRA was going to be charged as one of the three people involved in the death of CHRISTOPHER." Things can't possibly have taken place like SALDATE alleged.

Ken Ray: I see. Did Detective Ontiveros ask you why you had not conducted a tape-recorded interview when you returned to Phoenix?
Armando Saldate: He asked me if it had been tape-recorded?
Ken Ray: And you responded "No"?
Armando Saldate: "No".

Comment: That would have given police the perfect opportunity to now carry out a recorded version of the alleged confession, as was done with ROGER SCOTT and his confession.

Ken Ray: Did you tell him you elected not to record it?
Armando Saldate: Mr. Ray, I told him the truth, that she did not want it recorded.

Noel Levy: As she was going through this rendition, was she stating it in an even voice, or how?
Armando Saldate: Normal even voice. Sometimes the only emotion she had was of some concern about her family not liking her any more, people thinking, of course, thinking she may be crazy when she really isn't, and stuff like that.

Comment: Certainly ... her family! What is SALDATE talking about? Her mother, who already lived in Switzerland at the time? Her sister SANDY, who lived with her husband in Wyoming since July? Or her father RICHARD, who never really cared for Debra and lived in Florence? In fact, the biggest mistake Debra has made herself was to fill SALDATE in on her relationship with her son CHRISTOPHER, and the relationship and divorce from her ex-husband MARK MILKE. SALDATE used this information to fabricate his report, implying the so-called confession. If Debra hadn't said anything it wouldn't have been impossible for SALDATE to make his story up. But since she was innocent, law-abiding and desperate for news about her son she talked to the detective.

But most of it was just -- it was a friendly conversation. I mean, she was just talking to me.
Noel Levy: At the beginning or in the middle of this interview did she express any concern to you about the welfare of her son, such as, "I'm so worried about my son, what is going to happen with him", or anything like that?
Armando Saldate: Never.
Noel Levy: Now, at the end of the confession -- it was a confession, wasn't it?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Noel Levy: She did confess her involvement and inculpate herself as planning to have her son murdered by Jim Styers, knowing Roger Scott was in on it and her son would be killed that particular day?
Armando Saldate: Absolutely.

Discrepancy #6: Okay, let's have a look at SALDATE'S police report, containing the alleged confession. The only hint in that report, as far as the 'conspiracy issue' is concerned, is: "DEBRA said the plan was for JIM to do it and that he and ROGER would then go to Metro Center and claim that CHRIS had been lost." In no way is any coherent "planning" on Debra's part described in that report, and that's especially interesting since she - as CHRISTOPHER'S mother - was always portrayed as the "evil mind" behind this horrible crime. There is no coherent hint or evidence in any of the police records pertaining to her masterminding a conspiracy, or any 'planning'. Considering that she is alleged by the detective and the prosecutor to have planned the murder for weeks, the report of her "confessed" involvement is conspicuously confused and sketchy. But that is to be expected when the "confession" is fabricated by piecing together the incoherent ramblings of ROGER SCOTT with personal information gathered from a mother who has just learned in a cruel way about the murder of her child. None of the lucidity and new details regarding the crime that would be the hallmarks of an authentic confession are present in SALDATE'S "narrative report". But that doesn't worry LEVY. He just provided SALDATE with leading questions to help clean up his story.

Noel Levy: And that she knew all about it since 2:45 p.m. the previous day?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.

Discrepancy #7: That's not correct. No point or indication in SALDATE'S police report corroborated the allegation that Debra knew about CHRISTOPHER'S death since 2.45 p.m. on the day of his killing. This is solely an allegation and a repeat of the Deputy County Attorney's theory.

Noel Levy: And that part of the plan was to indicate a missing child deception at Metro Center?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Noel Levy: After all of that, did you suggest that she had other alternatives?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I did.
Noel Levy: What was her ultimate statement after that?
Armando Saldate: She said, "I guess I just made a bad judgment call".

Comment: An inflammatory "quote" for SALDATE'S report, which was repeated by the press uncritically and with much prejudice to Debra's chances for a fair trial. But as SALDATE'S report of his interview of SANDRA PICKINPAUGH shows, in his reports SALDATE freely invented imaginary quotes and - as Debra insists he did here - falsely represented his own statements as being the declarations of the interviewee.

Noel Levy: When she said that, was there any particular emotion?
Armando Saldate: None.
Noel Levy: Now, after that point what was her main concern? Was it about -- what was it about?
Armando Saldate: Her main concern the last quarter of the interview was her job, getting out, maybe lifetime probation, maybe the Court could give -- could fix her up so she would never have kids, just mainly herself.
Noel Levy: Did she express any concern about Jim?
Armando Saldate: She did express some concern about Jim. And I asked her why, and she says, "Well, you know, because he had to do it". And I asked her what she meant by that. She said, "Well, kill him". And I told her that the best thing for her to do was worry about herself, not Jim.

Comment: A completely made-up detail that fits neatly with the story ROGER SCOTT told that afternoon. But as the interview with ROBERT E. JOHNSON shows, it was apparently SCOTT - not STYERS - who shot CHRIS.

Noel Levy: On the way back to Phoenix did she continue to talk with you?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: And what was her -- what were her concerns?
Armando Saldate: Getting out, again some concern about her parents. She asked me if I would call her dad when I got back and she thought her dad might disown her, et cetera, so I told her that was her family, her family will not treat her that way, and she thought about maybe if I would call her employer up, maybe he would -- if she could get out on her own recognizance, she could go back to work the next day, and those kinds of general things.
Noel Levy: Did she ultimately ask you about an attorney?
Armando Saldate: She did ask me about calling -- when she asked about her father, she asked me if I would call her father and explain to him what had happened and why she did it and see if he could bail her out and also get her an attorney. I said, "I will".
Noel Levy: Did she ever ask for an attorney during --
Armando Saldate: Absolutely not.
Noel Levy: Did she ever invoke her right to remain silent by saying, "I don't wish to talk"?
Armando Saldate: Never.
Noel Levy: As a matter of fact, what was the end product of this with regard to her statement to you about the effect of the interview and your being there and listening to her?
Armando Saldate: She told me that she had not had anybody that would listen to her for a long time, something to that effect, and I was the first one to listen to her, and said she was starting to feel better, and then made the comment, "I think I'm starting to get a little bit of my self-esteem back".

Comment: Amazingly, even after more than a decade of solitary confinement Debra has always vehemently denied any confession and any participation in this crime, or knowledge about the murder of her son CHRISTOPHER. And SALDATE'S last claim raises another interesting point - why, if Debra had willingly confessed and then told SALDATE how much better she felt for having confessed, did he not try to get her to sign a statement of confession, repeat the confession in front of a witness, agree to make a taped confession, or do something that would make the confession verifiable instead of depending totally on the detective's word? That makes no sense if the story SALDATE is telling were true, but it makes perfect sense if the "confession" never occurred and was nothing but SALDATE'S fabrication.

( ... )

Noel Levy: Detective Saldate, you have already testified you were about 22 years on the Phoenix police force before you retired. Could you share with the Court about how many interviews of suspects that you have conducted?
Armando Saldate: Probably 200 or more.
Noel Levy: And how about with the homicide unit?
Armando Saldate: Fifty to seventy-five.
Noel Levy: And you indicated that you taught at the Phoenix Police Academy, taught interviewing suspects for a period of time?
Armando Saldate: No. I never taught interviewing. I taught some other parts of police work, but never interviewing. I have a hard time telling someone how to conduct interviews.
Noel Levy: In all of these interviews, if a person invoked any aspect of Miranda, whether it be for an attorney or silence, did you so note in your report?
Armando Saldate: Absolutely.
Noel Levy: In every case?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: Using the example of Shawn Running Eagle that Mr. Ray used yesterday, have you obtained a copy of that report this morning through Phoenix Police Department Detective Mills?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: And have you re-reviewed that particular supplement?
Armando Saldate: I have.

Comment: SALDATE'S "the-rules-don't-apply-to-me" style - he admits routinely ignoring suspects' constitutional rights, but that's okay, according to the detective, because he says he always notes his illegal behavior in his report. And this unlawful policy, I'll ignore the rules but note it in my report, is okay with LEVY.

( ... )

Noel Levy: Did you use a tape recorder?
Armando Saldate: No.
Noel Levy: Do you use, or have you used tape recorders in interviews?
Armando Saldate: I don't use a tape recorder in interviews.
Noel Levy: Is there a particular reason?
Armando Saldate: Several reasons. I think that a tape recorder is sometimes not a good tool to use, not as far as the detective is I concerned, but as far as that person is concerned. That person gets intimidated by the tape recorder, doesn't wish to feel -- doesn't feel as free to be able to express theirself (sic). And I'm there to get the information as that person wishes to tell me. And if she is -- he is held back by a tape recorder or feels intimidated, then I'm not going to get the information.

Comment: And we certainly know why that is. SALDATE obviously not only referred to suspects, but also to witnesses in general. He not only chose to not tape-record the interview with Debra Milke, but also his interview with Debra's sister, SANDY PICKINPAUGH on June 30, 1990. As we know today, his report about the interview is nothing but a complete falsehood, fabricating and twisting statements and reproducing things and timely matters twisted. If SANDRA hadn't recorded that interview upon request of her own father, RICHARD SADEIK, SALDATE'S report would still exists "as is" and could not be questioned. Fortunately, SALDATE'S dirty techniques are proven today.

Noel Levy: Has it been, then, your experience in not using a tape recorder that you have been more successful in contacts that the suspect is willing to talk to you?
Armando Saldate: Correct.
Noel Levy: Now, on the subject of Roger Scott you interviewed him on 12/3 of '89 starting at 1248, did you not?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I did.
Noel Levy: And did you give him his Miranda rights?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I did.
Noel Levy: Did he indicate he understood?
Armando Saldate: Yes, he did.
Noel Levy: Did he continue to talk about this Phil person who supposedly took him to Metro Center?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Noel Levy: Did you then tell him actually Phil didn't exist and that you knew Chris was dead and that sooner or later he was going to have to tell you the truth?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Noel Levy: Did you then tell him you would just leave the room for a little bit and let him consider that and you would be back?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Noel Levy: Did you come back in at 1342 hours and resume the interview?
Armando Saldate: Approximately, yes.
Noel Levy: Did he finally agree to tell you the truth?
Armando Saldate: Yes, he did.
Noel Levy: Now, with regard to the facts and the truth, did it turn out where he indicated the body of the child was on 99th Avenue just north of Happy Valley Road, the child being Christopher Milke?
Armando Saldate: That is correct. He was there.
Noel Levy: Did he tell you that they threw -- that Styers threw the bullet from -- the remaining bullets and casing from the gun on Union Hills on the way back to I-17 from 99th Avenue?
Armando Saldate: Yes, he did.
Noel Levy: And were those found?
Armando Saldate: Yes, they were.
Noel Levy: And then did he tell you that Styers gave him his gun and the shoes that he wore in the wash when he had killed the boy?
Armando Saldate: Yes, he did.
Noel Levy: Did you then find the gun in his closet that he had been given to dispose of and did it turn out to be Styers' gun that he had bought from James Hicks in late November?
Armando Saldate: Yes, it did.
Noel Levy: Did the shoes that he said Styers was wearing in the wash turn out to be, after foot casts were done and so forth per Dr. Birkby, that James Styers' feet went in those shoes?
Armando Saldate: That is correct.
Noel Levy: Were there tracks in the wash similar to the tracks of those tennis shoes?
Armando Saldate: Yes, there were.
Noel Levy: Did he indicate there were three shots that he heard?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: And did he indicate that James Styers had a .22 revolver six shot?
Armando Saldate: Yes, he did.
Noel Levy: Were the three -- was Chris Milke indeed killed with three shots to the back of the head with a small caliber, turning out to be a .22 caliber?
Armando Saldate: Yes, he was.

Noel Levy: Was there indeed a $5,000 insurance policy held by Debra Milke?

Noel Levy: So with regard to these facts, then, they have turned out to be accurate based upon your investigation, your completed investigation?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Noel Levy: I believe questions were asked to you with relation to a confession by Debra Milke on 12/3 of '89 commencing at 1953 hours. Did she tell you that she agreed with Jim Styers to kill her son?

Noel Levy: Did you discuss the aspect of the insurance policy with you --
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: -- with her, I mean. I'm sorry.
Armando Saldate: Yes, she did.
Noel Levy: Did she acknowledge Roger Scott was part of the plan?
Armando Saldate: Yes, she did.
Noel Levy: Based upon your investigation, was it -- was the child told that he was going to be taken to see Santa Claus when he was taken by Jim Styers from her apartment?

Noel Levy: And did she tell you that was the situation in her confession?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: Did she describe to you the clothes that Chris chose to wear on that morning?
Armando Saldate: Yes, she did.
Noel Levy: And were they boots, Levi's, sweatshirt with a yellow dinosaur on it?
Armando Saldate: That's correct.
Noel Levy: - Excluding the specifics of the yellow dinosaur, based upon your investigation is that what he was wearing?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: Based upon your investigation, was there a situation at Metro Center where Chris was reported missing on the afternoon of Saturday, December 2, of '89?
Armando Saldate: Yes, it was.
Noel Levy: Is that what she told you was part of the plan?
Armando Saldate: Yes, she did.
Noel Levy: With regard, then, to those facts and the corroborated facts, was her confession corroborated by the actual facts of your investigation?
Armando Saldate: Yes, it was.

Comment: Since SALDATE fabricated his confession by adding fictitious and misrepresented "quotes" from Debra to things she did say and facts that didn't implicate her, it is no surprise that some of the background details of his report are true. It is a standard way of creating a convincing lie : use true but inconsequential details to look credible and then add in the lies you want people to believe. All of the factual "corroborating" details that LEVY mentions were known to SALDATE before he interviewed Debra, and he simply used them to try to make his report believable. But nowhere is the hallmark of a true confession - new details about the crime learned from the suspect.

Noel Levy: Now, with regard to the procedure of the confession, did she ever ask for an attorney?
Armando Saldate: Absolutely not.
Noel Levy: At the end -- after she gave her confession, did she ask you to assist her or ask you if you could get her an attorney?
Armando Saldate: She asked me to call her father and ask him to get her an attorney.
Noel Levy: Did you do so?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I did.
Noel Levy: Now, there has been an allegation made, and in addition to that there has been a tape submitted into evidence by Mr. Ray, being the tape purportedly of Debra Milke to Dr. Kassell on December -- strike that -- on last Friday, which was September 7th, I believe, of this year. Have you had an opportunity to listen to that tape?
Armando Saldate: Yes, I have.
Noel Levy: Now, in relation to the actual confession of 12/3 of '89, what struck you while you were listening to that tape?
Armando Saldate: Well, the tape is very similar to my testimony. The facts -- the fact that I entered the room, the fact that I read her her right, the fact that I had told her about her arrest, the fact that she -- I told her about the penalties regarding to the arrest that she was going to be under. Everything was similar to what I have testified to.

Comment: ... and that is for a reason. This was SALDATE'S technique to make up a story. Sometimes his fabrications were so close to the original statement, that the interviewed individual would confirm his report [as it has happened with Debra's sister, SANDRA PICKINPAUGH, at trial when she wrongly confirmed the content of SALDATE'S report about the interview he had with her]. It wasn't Debra who told a story close to the content of his report; it was him, SALDATE, who created a story using Debra's words and adding some made-up facts (as, for instance, the 'confession').

Noel Levy: Now, you heard her purported crying on the tape.
Armando Saldate: Oh, yeah. She -- she indicated in the tape, though, that -- when he asked about her crying, I think she said she was angry. And, of course, she wasn't angry that day.
Noel Levy: And did it have also something to do with the very fact it was being tape recorded?
Armando Saldate: I made mention to that. She said she didn't know whether that was a reason why she was crying or not.
Noel Levy: And she did say she wanted -- she did say in that tape that after her rights were read to her, she said something to the effect she had never been in trouble so she didn't know what her rights really were?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: And then she claims she asked for --
Armando Saldate: She claims then she asked for an attorney.
Noel Levy: Are you aware -- so apparently she understood her rights?
Armando Saldate: She said she didn't in the tape, but --
Noel Levy: Going back to the actual confession, did it appear she understood her rights?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
( ... )

Noel Levy: Dr. Fritz testified yesterday -- and I'm just telling you to accept this -- that your report was altered and fabricated. And going through it page by page, coming to Page 7, everything appeared to be all right on my cross-examination, but he took exception with the fact at the very last paragraph you said, "It should be noted that this interview was not tape-recorded because Debra refused to have her statements tape-recorded", and, therefore the whole thing, according to him, is either fabricated or altered. Now --

Noel Levy: Is there any particular reason that you put that statement at the end of your supplement?
Armando Saldate: So people would know that's why it wasn't tape-recorded. That's not -- that portion of the interview was not the most important part of the interview. That's one of the mechanical things of the interview that would be at the end of the supplemental.

Discrepancy #8: If that were true he would have to do the same with every report he wrote about an unrecorded interview. But neither his reports about the interviews with ERNIE SWEAT, SANDRA PICKINPAUGH nor MARK MILKE include such a mechanical end note.

Noel Levy: Again, listening to the tape of Debra Milke of September 7th, purportedly in front of Dr. Kassell, did she happen to mention the tape-recording aspect of your interview of her back on December 3?
Armando Saldate: Yes.
Noel Levy: What is it you recall her saying in that taped statement?
Armando Saldate: She said she did not want me to tape-record it.