Interview of
Armando Saldate, Jr.

On June 26, 1990 defense attorney Kenneth Ray, III, and State Attorney (Prosecutor) NOEL LEVY interviewed the leading Phoenix police detective ARMANDO SALDATE to prepare for their court appearances in the Debra Jean Milke Case.
We published huge excerpts from this interview, since it not only confirms his prejudiced behavior towards Debra, but also brought some other interesting details to surface and made it bluntly plain that Phoenix police never had any intention to even consider that a different scenario in the murder case of CHRISTOPHER CONAN MILKE may have taken place.

This interview allows insight into the interrogation techniques of DETECTIVE SALDATE, which - as the normal onlooker may not presume automatically - are leading in order to intimidate suspects and witnesses. Debra's own sister, SANDRA PICKINPAUGH, later revealed a lot about these techniques in a telephone interview she gave former defense attorney Anders V. Rosenquist. In that she confirmed that SALDATE was calling her up on June 29, 1990 and pressured her for that interview just one day after that, on June 30, 1990.

Before analyzing the interview, please note that the transcript by Copperstate Reporting Service, Inc. was dated as follows:
PHOENIX, ARIZONA, MAY 3, 1990, 3:13 P.M. (MORE THAN A MONTH PRIOR TO THE ACTUAL INTERVIEW) AND AT THE END DATED WITH JULY 23, 1990, whereas the actual interview took place on JUNE 26, 1990. How can an official interview report be dated prior to the interview having taken place?

BY MR. RAY:

Q: Today's the 26th of June, 3:13 in the afternoon, in the office of the Deputy County Attorney Noel Levy. Present is Armando Saldate?
A: Armando Saldate, Jr.


( ... )

Q: Okay. Did she seem interested, like perhaps you had some news to give her or something, like anxious to hear what you would have to say?
A: I don't know if she appeared that way, but she just sat there and said, "Oh, hi." And I entered and I introduced myself.
And I'm sure that - Detective Hamrick said that he told her that I was en route and that I wanted to talk to her, so I'm sure that she knew that I wanted to talk to her.

Discrepancy #1: Here SALDATE led Ken Ray into a wrong direction: By suggesting that DET. HAMRICK had talked to Debra, SALDATE'S claim that he only made the decision to arrest her inside the interrogation room (the jail dispensary at the Pinal County Sheriff's Jail) makes sense. In fact - as later unraveled in the courtroom - DET. HAMRICK has neither spoken with Debra, her acquaintance JANET FROEBE, nor DET. SALDATE upon his arrival in Florence. It was an employee of the Pinal County Sheriff's Office, DEPUTY SOULES, who talked to Debra and told her that a detective of Phoenix police was en route to Florence and wanted to talk to her. Nevertheless, HAMRICK knew about the forthcoming arrest of Debra.

Q: Right. But it was clear from the moment that you entered in there that she had no idea that the boy had been found?
A: I don't know if I can make that statement, because I don't know what was in her mind.
Q: Okay. How did she react when you told her that the boy had been found?
Let me back up. Did you -- when you told her the boy had been found, did you couple your statement together with "found dead," or did you just tell her that the boy had been found?
A: I think I told her that her son had been found and that he was dead. But if you don't mind, if I could --
Q: Please.
A: That he had been found shot to death.
Q: Okay. So, she was just immediately given the gorey details all in one spoonful, as it were?
A: What? What was that? Immediately given the gorey details --
Q: That's right.
A: -- that her son had been found shot to death? No, I did not give her gorey --
Q: Sum and substance.
A: -- details. I did not give her gorey details. I told her the facts.

Comment: At this point SALDATE had seen Debbie no longer than probably three minutes. It should be noted that in the meantime it has been established SALDATE not only filled Debra in on the death of her son and that the boy had been found, but also that he told her she was under arrest ... all in one breath! Those were his facts. But other than this ... the only piece of circumstantial evidence SALDATE had towards Debra was the questionable allegation of ROGER SCOTT. Only two scenarios were possible at this time: SALDATE wanted to find out about Debra's alleged involvement, or SALDATE was determined to arrest and railroad Debra one way or the other. As you read on, please keep this in mind.

Q: The reason I was asking is because if you had told her that her son had been found, I want -- and that alone, I wanted you to tell me what her reaction was.
But -
A: No.
Q: You told her, found shot to death, and then you describe that she immediately began to yell out, "What? What?"
A: That's correct.
Q: All right. Describe her demeanor in saying those words, "What? What?"
A: Excited. She sounded somewhat excited. She, she remained seated. I was seated next to her. And she yelled, "What? What?" And sounded excited. And that was about it.
Q: Did she have a look of surprise an her face?
A: No. I don't think she ever had a look of surprise. Excitement, anxious, later on somewhat embarrassed, but never surprised.
Q: Did she appear angry at any time?
A: Not towards me.
Q: Okay.
A: She seemed concerned at times about herself and one time about Jim. And after we got beyond the first portion of the interview she was calm. She was kind of relieved. Very quiet, calm, told me everything in a quiet voice, very calm, voice.
But surprised, I'd never -- I wouldn't use surprised.

Comment: It's obvious what SALDATE tried to accomplish when he told this to KEN RAY. Picture the claim: ... Even if Debra had conspired to have her son killed, would a suspected and arrested person sound calm? It makes a great deal of sense that Debra vehemently denies SALDATE'S version of the interview up to this very day. Take only the time frame (35 minutes) he claims to have had with her, and then to come up with a report (6 1/2 pages) which not even a speedwriter could accomplish ... no wonder more and more observers believe that SALDATE fabricated the confession, and is it likely that Debra has been very quiet, with a calm voice?

Q: Okay. Your report says that she yelled out the words, "What? What?" She then started to scream and make noises as if she was crying, but no tears were visible. What was she screaming?
A: Noises. You know, she was saying, "What? What?" And, you know, I was -- I don't know what. I couldn't make them out. I don't know what they were.

Comment: So, she WAS emotional, but he is not willing to admit to describe her real state of mind.

Q: How could you describe it for me as best you can?
A: Just noises, just, you know, I don't know if they were just syllables of words that she was using. I -- I don't know. I can't --

Comment: He can't describe what Debra was screaming, but he can write down a seven page police report three days after an interview? What are the noises he keeps referring to?

Q: Did she ever say, "Oh, my God," or anything?
A: No. No. That would be in my supplement if I could understand them. No. They were just noises.
Q: Was she acting hysterical?
A: No.

Comment: Then why did he keep harping on the noises she made by his own admission?

Q: You indicate that you were not going to tolerate her crying?
A: That's correct.
Q: All right. Her making these noises and screaming, you told her you were not going to tolerate that; is that what you were saying?
A: That's correct.
Q: All right. A person who has just been told that her son has been found shot to death, you don't characterize whatever she was her reaction as being consistent with anything you have seen before?
A: A person that had conspired to have her son killed, and now has been found out, and now is being interviewed, and now is making noises and saying, "What? What?" And trying to cry and no tears are coming out, there is no emotion from her.

Comment: That is what he claims without any witness to prove otherwise. As we can also see in Saldate's interview with Debra's sister SANDY PICKINPAUGH, SALDATE has a habit of coming to his own psychological conclusions. Remember the presumptions a little earlier? This last sentence makes it very clear that SALDATE was convinced of Debra's involvement in the killing of her son even before he ever laid eyes on her. He was prejudiced and biased and had his agenda planned (corroborated by other police officers in the police report).

There is only an action, or reactions, for me to believe that she's trying somehow to pull some emotion from herself and exhibit that emotion so I may feel for her. No, I could not tolerate that, and that's what happened.
Q: Okay. Then you advised her that she was under arrest?
A: Correct.

Comment: Compared to the various court documentary, things took place in a different string of proceedings. SALDATE had informed Debra of her being under arrest by saying "We found your son, he was murdered and you are under arrest." It is established in the legal documents that these were the first words he said to her after introducing himself.

Q: And you relate she became very excited. Again, was she going through the same routine again, then, as you just described?
A: She was then excited because of what I just told her about her being under arrest.
Q: What you've got to understand, Detective, is that we don't have a video of what is going on, so we need -- I need to be able to visualize this as best I can with whatever you will describe for me.

Comment: Ken Ray has a hard time to picture the situation. So do we.

A: And I'll try to.

Comment: ... and make it fit in his story.

Q: I appreciate that.
A: As long as you -- but anyway, excited by the facts of what I told her that she was under arrest and then we were concerned or she became concerned and excited about, not the fact that her son had been found shot, but, in fact, what I had said about her being under arrest. She was excited. And, probably, that wasn't the best word to use.

Comment: How could SALDATE know what it was that Debra was concerned or excited about? Any presumption regarding that action can only be subjective.

She was -- wanted to know what I meant by being under arrest. I told her she was under arrest, and that's basically it. She just showed a little bit -- she went from trying to -- to fake some emotion, to all of a sudden excitement to, "What do you --  what do you mean? What what are you saying? What? What? What? What? What?" Those are the emotions she showed.

Comment: Picture a situation where you're torn between shock and grief about the news of the death of your child, and the shock and lack of understanding because of an arrest. Who wouldn't say 'What? What? What?'

Q: You went on to tell her that she had been implicated in the murder by Jim and Roger?
A: Yeah.

Discrepancy #2: A completely made up falsehood. JIM STYERS never implicated Debra in the murder, just the opposite : he often stated she had no participation in this at all. It was merely ROGER SCOTT who incriminated her, but that took place approximately 30 minutes or more after SCOTT had admitted his involvement. Without being tied to this initial statement SALDATE tried to make believe that both, SCOTT and STYERS, implicated her, until Ken Ray continues ...

Q: Okay. Clearly Roger had made a statement?
A: Right.

Comment: Roger Scott (after being grilled for many hours and being threatened to have his mother's house ransacked for the weapon) told SALDATE that he was told by JIM STYERS that the mother wanted the boy dead. Only half an hour later he would implicate Debra. SALDATE didn't even care to clarify by himself that STYERS has never implicated Debra ...

Q: But had Jim made any statements to implicate her in this?
A: No.

Comment: ... until Ken Ray asks. Only now SALDATE admits that JIM STYERS didn't incriminate Debra at all. He obviously didn't like that to come out.

Q: In this at all?
A: No.
Q: All right. Did you say that, Jim and Roger, for a reason?
A: No.

Comment: This is important: MR. RAY asked SAKDATE whether he said that ROGER and JIM have implicated Debra, both of them, and if alleging this had happened was done for a reason. Of course SALDATE noticed the wind of change and that this statement wasn't very clever.

Q: When you said that --
A: I read that later on and I checked it with my notes, and that's exactly what I said.

Discrepancy #3: Notes? What notes? Hasn't SALDATE always claimed that he had destroyed the notes he used to write his report? This cop's a liar; his pattern as he himself admitted to in Debra's trial as a proven technique, does not pan out. You either have notes or you don't and if they are requested, the burden of proof lies with him.

The only thing I can say is that at that point my mind was set, you know, I had already -- well, not -- I shouldn't say set, but I knew that Jim and Roger were involved and may have said that because those were the other two people that were involved.

Comment: What's the difference between "my mind was already set" and "I knew ..." (without evidence), which is contradictory to his various statements before the Grand Jury and later testimony under oath in court. SALDATE fabricated "his case" according to his own will, against any normal legal procedures, even going against the ordered procedures of his superiors as far as the "interview" with the mother was concerned. With the "help" of "bystanders" it was a piece of cake. You have to come up with a "guilty one", one way or the other, and all is in order.

Q: It was clear that Jim and Roger, obviously, were involved. I mean Roger's the one that took everybody out there to where the body was found; isn't that right?
A: Yes.
Q: And what was it about Jim that led you to believe that he definitely was involved, other than Roger's statement, if you know of anything?
A: No, right off the mat, I don't.
Q: Okay.
A: I haven't reviewed that part of the report.

Comment: SALDATE did not elect to do so ... and even if he had done so, nothing's in there anyway. There is no final proof of who committed the murder to this very day. It has never been established in a court room who actually shot Christopher, but we know that ROGER SCOTT confessed the killing to co-inmate ROBERT JOHNSON.

Q: All right. Then you advised her of her Miranda rights. Was she still acting excited or --
A: I had -- I had told her by that time to calm down.
Q: How much time did you give her to calm down before you read her her rights?
A: Couple of seconds.

Comment: This cop of twenty years - pardon, twenty-one years - of experience didn't even take into consideration that Debbie's shock was so intense that 'a couple of seconds' wouldn't be enough to comprehend and handle the situation? Later even DR. MARTIN KASSELL, the Durango jail psychiatrist testified that Debra told him she was too shocked to absorb her Miranda warnings.

Q: Did she immediately calm down upon you're telling --
A: Sure did.
Q: -- her to do so?
A: Sure, definitely.
Q: She didn't whimper, moan, sniffle?
A: She in fact, it was the opposite. It was almost like shutting a faucet. And it wasn't -- and I don't mean that by her -- as if she was crying and tearing or anything like that, but her emotions were -- were -- were -- were just, I mean they came out. I shut the faucet off, the emotions ended. I read her her rights, and then we went on from there.

Comment: The first duty of a police trying to arrest a person is to read them the Miranda Rights. When Debra was confronted to hear that her son was not only missing, but killed and being confronted with that knowledge alone and then, in the same breath being confronted of being arrested for conspiracy, having being read the Miranda rights is more than grotesque. In her recollections to her attorney, she referred to it as "Saldate pulling out a business card" and not knowing what he said at this particular moment. If she had any pre-knowledge of the occurrences, she would have known what to face and act accordingly.

Q: As you told her to calm down and you weren't going to tolerate this and so forth, was she looking straight into your face, or was she looking away from you?
A: Directly.
Q: Okay. Did her facial expressions change as she was looking at you when you told her she was under arrest for the death of her son?
A: Like I said, she, before that, had been going through these other emotions, or feigning these other emotions, and then I told her that, and then she became excited and more attentive to what I was saying about being under arrest.
And then her facial expressions were, if anything, were of I got her attention. And before it was the -- before, she was more concerned about her actions and how she was going to portray or follow-up these actions.
And as soon as I told her about being under arrest she immediately became very aware of what -- of what we were talking about, very excited, was very attentive to what I said at that point as to what I told you.
Q: Were you aware at the time of this interview (inaudible) how long she had been awake or up?
A: No.
Q: You were aware that, at least up to some point in time, she had been at her apartment, in and out of the presence of various investigating officers. Were you aware of that?
A: I was aware that -- I was aware that this investigation had taken a long period of time.

Comment: Long period of time? This cop was determined to get three people on death row within two days. Are two days of investigation a long period of time in a murder case? But what Ken Ray intended to point out is the fact that Debra had dealt with police cops because of the missing person's report for a long time, almost 24 hours prior to SALDATE'S appearance. If she had an intention to take refuge she could have easily done so before ...

Q: Roughly how long before the time the body was found, if you know?
A: Roughly, I don't know. I don't know. I don't even know the time of the missing persons report, other than me referring to it.
Q: Okay.
A: Because I didn't get involved in it. I was involved later.
Q: Now, in responding to whether or not she understood her Miranda rights you indicate that she moved her head up and down. Did she ever verbalize her response?
A: Yes.
Q: And she said the word "yes"?
A: If you go on to the next sentence it probably does.
Q: All right. Then she starts going back through some more emotions again.
A: Uh-huh.
Q: Is that before you say anything to her, again, after reading the rights?
A: Correct.
Q: All right. Now are these, or this is more like the same type of emotions she initially exposed, rather than the excited emotions?
A: Same kind of emotions that she was faking the first time, she started again.
Q: And you, again, had to tell her that you were not going to tolerate that?
A: That's correct.
Q: Were you being strong in your statement to her that you're not going to tolerate this, like you were talking to your child or something, that I'm not going to tolerate that, shake your finger or anything?
A: No, I don't do that. I told her I would not tolerate it. I don't yell, I don't scream. I'm very to the point. I look at the person. I'm not going to tolerate this, and that's exactly the way I told her. I didn't raise my voice. It's just I think it's more important what you say, than how you say it.

Comment: In any expert's opinion on this subject, it is total coercion.

Q: At any time during the course of this interview did she suggest that she wanted to speak with an attorney?
A: No.

Comment: Not true, because that exactly what she requested.

Q: At any time did she suggest she wanted to speak with anyone else, her father, someone else?
A: No.

Comment: Wrong. That is one of the first things she requested, but was permitted to do although a phone was available.

Q: A priest?
A: In fact, she did not want to talk -- she was very emphatic about the fact that her parents or her relatives would not like her, and it was -- I think it was she liked when I listened to her. She liked the way we sat there and talked. She was very comfortable with me. She -- I think that she felt I was a friend.
Q: Did you do anything to get her to feel comfortable with you? Did you tell her, "It's going to be all right, Debra"? It's going to be all right, or anything like that, anything to --
A: Did I --
Q: -- to settle her down and make her believe that you're on her side?
A: No, I -- Debra knew from the very minute I got there that she was under arrest.

Discrepancy #4: That's interesting: He had nothing against her, no confession, nothing but a two-time hearsay implication, but arrested her in the very minute he got there? Thank you MR: SALDATE, no more questions... He made it clear himself that he railroaded Debra. And by the way: This is in conflict with what SALDATE had stated earlier, when he claimed he had arrested her only after some minutes of the interview.

Debra knew through the interview that she was going to jail. Debra knew, and that's probably why she felt comfortable with me.

Comment: She felt comfortable with him because she knew she was going to jail? Who should believe this? Even according to her psychiatrists she had no idea WHY she was going to jail other than leaving her child in the care of a trusted friend.

Debra knew from the very minute I got in there that I was going to be honest with her. I told her that I only wanted the truth, that's all I was there for. I was not going to listen to anything else but the truth.
I was very calm. I don't ever raise my voice. I sit in front of a person. I'm there to listen to them. I'm there to listen to the truth. I'm not there to listen to a bunch of lies. She knew that. She felt very comfortable with that.

Comment: And Debra tells us : "He began to get angry and was yelling, 'I am not here to tolerate this behavior. You can quit the act, because I know the whole story.'" Very comfortable!

She knew she was in trouble. She knew that. I never tried to minimize what she said. In fact, she asked me several times in the interview if I understood her. If I understood what she did. And several times I -- at least several times I told her I understand what you're telling me. I don't condone what you did. But, yeah, I understand what you're telling me.
I didn't -- I didn't get angry with her. I never got angry with her. And I think that was what she felt comfortable with, because she had this feeling from the very beginning that everyone was going to be angry with her, her parents and her family were going to be angry with her. People in jail were going to be angry with her, but that I was the only person, and, again, she felt, understood her.
But I corrected her and told her, "No, I don't understand what you did. I understand what you're telling me, but I don't understand what you did or why you did it." And that's why I think at that point during this interview we got along. She was very comfortable with me.
Q: Did she specifically tell you that she and Roger and Jim conspired to have this little boy killed, or did you tell her that that's the information that you had gathered thus far?
A: Let me explain the interview.

Comment: SALDATE appeared to have a hard time simply stating "yes" or "no". But to fill the reader in, Debra never said she had conspired (not even in his report!) and you may as well read SALDATE'S original police report here.

Q: Okay.
A: I asked during the interview -- during my interviews that I hold I ask very little questions. And most of the questions that I do ask are usually at the beginning of the interview and usually at the end of the interview. Sometimes I -- there may be questions in the middle, but only because I may be confused at one point and may want to ask her to her or anyone else, to clarify it.
The interview with Debra was of narrative form. I sat there and I listened to Debra. I may -- may have been one of the only people that would -- at that point, may have been one of the only people that had listened to Debra. Not trying to condemn her, but I sat there and I listened to her. She would talk to me and what -- she knew what she did.
She knew what she was telling me. And as I was hearing it she would try to -- try to make areas not seem as important, but I would stop her and I'd tell her -- like I told her from the beginning, I told her from the beginning, I said, "When you -- when you're talking to me, or when I'm listening to you, when we're having this interview, I do not want you to minimize your involvement."

Comment: Did he state somewhere Debra ever committed her involvement in a conspiracy to have her son killed? Why is it so hard for him to say "she has admitted to have conspired?" Why does he never talk about this crime and Debra's alleged involvement in full sentences? In fact, as far as we know, because she never did, and that is because there was no conspiracy on her part.

She knew that. I like to go on an interview with someone with them knowing the rules. These are the rules. It's my interview and these are the rules. And this is what we're going to do. I'm not going to sit here and listen to a bunch of lies. If you're going to lie to me, I'll just walk out or leave. And lie to somebody else. I don't get angry, though.


( ... )


Note: MR. LEVY talking to SALDATE meanwhile, leaving the subject of the confession. After that, Ken Ray continues the interview ...

But I wasn't, also, going to condemn her for whatever she told me.

Comment: As we have learned in the paragraph prior to the break Debra has not made any confession, SALDATE has not confirmed a confession, so it may be considered proven that no confession ever took place. The cop was careful not to incriminate himself with a false testimony.

And that's why the interview took place the way it did. She told me what happened. I didn't -- I didn't drag it out of her. She sat there and just kind of decided that this is the guy I want to tell everything to, and did.

Comment: ... but did not confess.

Q: Did you have any information about her background before you went in to speak with her?
A: No, none.
Q: Any knowledge about anything about her?
A: None.
Q: Was there something -- you have been on the force what, 20 -
A: 21 years.
Q: Was there something just about her that you knew, just almost immediately upon seeing her, that this style of investigative technique was going to work with her?
A: No. My style never changes. It never changes. My tone of voice never changes. I approach every interview knowing I don't care how serious the crime is. And I have been involved within homicide for the past four years, four and a half years. I approach every interview believing that that person that's sitting across from me, no matter how bad the crime is, wants to tell someone.
And I believe that sometimes, and the biggest problem that people have, I think, is that they don't understand that when your lips are moving you can't hear anything. So what I do is I talk ten percent of the time, let them talk 80 percent of the time, because I'm a good listener.
Me and you could sit here and we could talk all day long and I'll listen to you. I may go to an interview -- I have interviews with people that do not confess to me. I may have an interview with someone that will never confess to me, but we will sit there and talk for four or five hours --
Q: During the course of a situation like that --
A: -- during the course.
Q: -- will you tell them that, you know, "Look, I know what you're telling me just isn't true"?
A: I will tell them. I'm -- I'm very honest. I will tell them immediately if -- if they are lying to me I'll tell them, "You're lying to me. I don't need to listen to that."
Now, if you want to talk -- if that person wants to talk about how tall that building is over there we may sit here and talk for hours about how tall that building is, and I'll tolerate that. We can sit here and talk, as long as we're talking and he's telling me the truth, because he can see that building's tall and I can see that building's tall.

Comment: SALDATE'S famous comparisons. Very interesting, but what does it accomplish? And what does it have to do with Debra and the murder that happened to her son? This way he also took SANDY in (see "Interrogation of Sandra Pickingpaugh").

But if he starts telling me that building's only about four foot high, I'm not going to sit here and listen to him.

Comment: ... and if a suspect doesn't tell him what he wants to hear, it turns out like Debra has revealed above?

So, as long as we can sit and have a conversation and we mutually agree that you're not trying to bullshit me and I'm not going to bullshit you, then we will have a conversation for hours.

Comment: The question is whether bullshit is only what he wants to hear, or what the truth is about.

Q: Have you found that technique of investigation to be successful ?
A: It's not a technique. I have -- that's that's me.

Comment: Thankfully he doesn't claim these intimidating methods were a TECHNIQUE applied in general.

Q: I mean, there are different techniques you know; is that right?
A: There's different techniques, and I'm asked this all the time about, well, what schools did you go to for interview techniques? Did you go to -- I have never been to an interview school, because I don't have problems talking to people and people don't have problems understanding me.

Comment: Keep this for the record : this cop has not attended any school for interview techniques! But he claims to be successful with a history of over twenty cases where he falsified, intimidated, manipulated ...? Oh, c'mon! If this isn't self-righteousness and arrogance ... so we're exactly at what DR. MARTIN KASSELL, a jail psychiatrist who has stated : "A paranoid personality in which everyone else is wrong." But Ken Ray's question aimed at something else: This way it became obvious that SALDATE wasn't capable of using and had no understanding about the variety of techniques possible to approach various suspects under various different circumstances. He wasn't trained for these various possibilities at all, other than intimidating the people he suspected.

They don't have problems knowing where I'm coming from. I'm very straightforward. I never -- I say "never," I should never say never, but I don't -- I don't get angry at someone.
If you're going to tell me a lie, I'm going to tell you it's a lie.

Comment: What other proof is needed to uncover that this person, ARMANDO SALDATE, was unable and not keen for unprejudiced investigative police work? How could he possibly judge what a lie is without implicating that the truth is what he wants to hear?

But I'm not going to get angry at you. I've handled a lot of high profile cases where people have done some heinous things to other people, adults to kids, but I never, ever -- and that's when I can honestly say never -- go into an interview room with a preconceived thought that this guy or this girl is the biggest asshole there ever was, with the preconceived thought that I don't like this person, because I try to just deal with that person one on one, as I did with Debra, and not interject the fact of what she did.

Comment: ... as long as he gets to hear what he wants to hear ...

And I did not interject the fact myself of what she did. I did not say, "Well, you killed your kid," and all this other stuff, and you went there, you know. I told her what I was investigating.

Comment: After his attack of self-glory MR. SALDATE returns to earth and reminds himself of what he should state towards a defense attorney : I didn't interject that Debra has plotted! 'As long as she admits it, it's the truth, since I want it that way.'

But it's -- it's her job. It's her job. It's her feelings. It's what she wants to do, to tell me what she did and why she did it. Don't necessarily mean I'm going to understand it, like I told her, but I'm not going to condemn her for it, not like I'm not even going to condemn her now.

Comment: Sure, this cop accomplished an alleged confession, something Debra has denied ever after for twelve years.

Q: What -- I take it, then, when you spoke to Roger Scott you basically did the same type of -
A: Exactly.
Q: -- demeanor and so forth?
A: Exactly.
Q: What do you think it was that caused him to change his story now, from what it had been previously and all along up to that point? 
A: I'll tell you exactly what it was. I told him that he wasn't telling the truth and that I didn't believe him. Other officers were sitting there with him listening to what he said, knowing that it wasn't the truth, and I wasn't going to do that.
When I walked in with Roger and heard him say a couple of things and heard him generally go over the -- I stopped him and I said, "That ain't the truth." Just like I told Debra. And I wasn't going to listen to him. And I -

Comment: That may have worked with ROGER SCOTT to find out the truth about the actual condition of Christopher Milke and where the dead body could be found. But still, since SALDATE has not confirmed her confession towards Ken Ray, there is nothing to implicate her other than the rambling allegation of SCOTT.

Q: (Inaudible) -- you told Roger that -- did you have any evidence to suggest that he was not telling the truth, or was -
A: Factual evidence, or just my gut feeling?
Q: Factual evidence.
A: No.

Comment: Which means what? If he is fortunate in solving one case this way, it always has to be like this, is that what he's saying???

Q: No. But you're gut feeling was that --
A: I had a gut feeling.
Q: -- that he wasn't telling the truth?
A: Definitely wasn't telling the truth.
Q: So your straightforward, in a calm --
A: Very straightforward.
Q: -- almost a monotonous tone of voice, told him, "Roger, your story is not the truth"?
A: I wish you wouldn't use monotonous, though, there Ray, it makes me feel bad, you know.

Comment: ... and concerned about his sanity ...

Q: Me too. Monotonous. I should say -
A: I have been told that's exactly right. My interviews have been -- have been described as being -- my voice as being very monotone, and very -- that's true, but -
Q: And I'm not condemning you for that.
A: -- but the fact of the matter is, I don't change my -- no matter if I'm talking to (inaudible) or talking to Styers -- and when I talked to Styers I did the same thing. Styers didn't tell me the truth. I knew he wasn't telling me the truth. I wasn't going to listen to him (inaudible) at the end of the interview, you know.
Q: He didn't -- he didn't turn around like Debra did and like Scott did?
A: Not all -- not all people do. And I don't do it for them to do that. I don't -- I mean that's just - I mean that's what used car dealers do, you know, or used car salesmen do. Well, I don't want this, and then they expect you to walk away, and then you're going to come back, or he's going to come back.
I don't do that. If the person tells me - if me and that person cannot talk, and he's lying to me, I'm not going to listen to it, I'm going to leave. That's the end of it.
I don't tell a person that I'm going to not listen to it or not tolerate it to get her to tell me things. I don't do that for that reason. I'm telling her for the honest to God's truth, this is what's going to happen. This is it. I'm going to sit here and I'm going to talk to you, but I'm not going to listen to lies, and I'm not going to tolerate her.
And in her instance, trying to feign an emotion that -- to try to get a little bit of sympathy from me and try to -- for her. And she was feigning this emotion to try to -- to try to buy herself some time, because --
Q: Time to do what?
A: To think --
Q: Okay.
A: -- what is she going to say next. And when I tell these people this, that's what I mean.

Comment: Again : if we look at the more than twenty cases he was proven by court to falsify and manipulate testimonies or confessions, even these statements are uncovered as lies. Or let's not call them lies, but self-righteous statements of denial.

I don't do it to try to get them to admit or to cop or to confess. I'm there to get the truth, the confession. Sure, that's my job.
The truth comes with -- if I get the truth, and if they tell me, "Look, I honestly did not do this. I honestly am not involved in this." And if I honestly feel that's the truth, that's the truth.

Comment: Which - on the other hand - means, that if he does not agree or does not feel like this, it cannot be the truth? But what happens to people who just don't act like MR. SALDATE feels what is right?

I get -- I go there to get the truth. That's what I deal with, and that's why I have no problem with sitting there and listening to what they say. And I know some officers do -- I know some officers, some detectives go over there to get a confession. To get this guilty bastard so they can do him. That's not me. I go in there to get the truth. When I go into an interview room. I want the truth, the truth.

Comment: ... and when in doubt even without a tape-recorder, a witness or a signature to a confession. The main thing is he gets things his way. Most of his co-officers would claim a different attitude and some had the guts to do so.

Q: What I'm gathering, I'm gathering that while on occasion there may be some facts that you already know thereby to judge whether he's telling you the truth or not, many times you operate from a gut instinct as to whether it's true or not?
A: Many times you have to. I wasn't there. That person knows, or that person conspired. In Debra's case she knows what was going to take place. I don't know.

Comment: Right, SALDATE didn't know. He had absolutely nothing against Debra Milke other than SCOTT'S allegation, which set his mind relentlessly to this kind of scenario. Motto: I may solve this case and be the hero without any major obstacles.

So whatever facts or fingerprints, whatever evidence I may have, it may not tell the entire truth until that person -- if that person elects to tell me, then we'll know the truth from her perspective. Not necessarily the entire truth, but from her perspective, as she knows or as she feels the truth is.
Q: When you were interviewing Scott, and you told him that he wasn't telling you the truth, how did you know that what he said afterwards turned out -- was in fact, the truth, and sufficient so that you had, you and your supervisor, whatever, had in mind that you were going down to arrest Debra?
A: You never know if it's the entire truth, like I said a minute ago. It's from their perspective. It's from what that person feels, how that person saw it develop, and how that person kind of looked at it, did determine, well, yeah, this is the truth. This is what he said and this is what she's saying and that's how he's interpreting what happened.
And from what he told me, I felt he was telling me the truth as he knew it. Now, there may be some factual errors, but there will be factual errors in Debra's story.

Comment: ... how true ... some ... But also keep this for the record: SALDATE confirmed that he felt SCOTT told him the truth and therefore was determined - as we have learned before - to go to Florence to arrest Debra. This confirmation - in fact - supports the assumption that SALDATE indeed lied about the alleged confession, and not Debra.

There will be factual errors in Jim's story, as there will be in Roger's story, because they're all looking at it from a different perspective.
Q: What I'm getting at, though, is that up until he said that, Debra was not a suspect at all, was she?
A: No.
Q: And you knew that the story that Roger had been giving, in your gut at least, was just not right?
A: Was not the truth.
Q: And so he comes off with another story that implicates Debra as being a participant in some conspiracy?
A: Right.
Q: Did you have a doubt in your mind that what he was then telling you was the truth?
A: No. When Scott and I sat down and talked, ultimately talked, after we got stuff out of the way, I felt that Scott was telling me the truth. And I judge it -- I judge a lot by whether I know -- whether I feel that that person is believing that I'm telling them the truth, because I think that's when you can really -- that's when you can really judge an interview, when that person is comfortable understanding that you're telling them the truth, and not until then will they feel comfortable with telling you the truth.
And I think we've gotten to that stage. He told me the truth. He understood I was telling him the truth. The same way it happened with Debra. She tried to lie. She tried to feign these emotions, thinking that her yelling, her hysterics, would drive me away, would maybe cause me to leave the room for her to calm down, for her to be thinking. But it didn't. I -- I was confronted with that. I handled it. She understood that I handled it.
And when she understood that I handled it she began to believe me and was -- and, I think, felt that I was going to tell her the truth, was going to deal with her on the truth and nothing else. Then she felt at that point comfortable to tell me the truth. And that's the basis of any of my interviews. That's how I deal with them.

Comment: We're at a point in this performance where something else should be brought to the attention of the onlooker : in his interrogation with Debra's sister SANDRA PICKINPAUGH only four days after this interview, SALDATE alleged Debra had flashed her breasts to him in order to ... whatever. It's just interesting that in this interview, in a room together with Mr. Ray and MR. LEVY, SALDATE doesn't say a single word about this allegation. And in fact, in court, this allegation was disproved, since Debra wore completely different clothes than what he had told SANDY. In his interrogation with SANDY she made a remark that led SALDATE to fabricate this incident with Debra to discriminate against her and use every allegation possibly helpful to damage Debra's reputation in front of her younger sister SANDY. It's just interesting to see that this incident is not mentioned in this transcript at all. This lying cop had a dangerous pattern. So, let's presume this point is a proven fact ... SALDATE used every character damaging point he could get, in order to justify Debra's arrest, in order to serve the prosecution with an additional defendant a clicnher.

Q: In reviewing the notes that you have in your report that you made of the interview with Debra, is there anything that you have noted that is either absent or inaccurate?
A: No. And I reviewed that supplemental briefly before I came over. I hadn't before, but -- I mean I had several types before, but not in recent history, not within a month or so. And it's -- everything's there as I remember it.

Comment: Didn't we learn about SALDATE'S alleged confession that he has destroyed his pertinent notes after writing his seven-page police report? His proclaimed notes (which according to his own statement have been destroyed, if they were ever taken) and his supplementals may well become an issue real soon. (Please, also compare this to discrepancy #2)

MR. RAY: Let's take about a five-minute break. I'm about to bust.

MR. SALADATE: It's hot in here.

(Recess was taken.)