Article 32 Hearing
Volume 16

September 9, 1970

Specialist Seven William Ivory (CID)

(The hearing reopened at 1452 hours, 9 September 1970.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that those parties that were in attendance at the beginning of the recess are currently in the hearing room.
     At this time, does the government have further evidence to offer?

CPT SOMERS:  Yes, sir.  First, we would like to have marked this interview work sheet done by Judson and Park on the Caspers which I previously mentioned, and which I stated that we would offer as a government exhibit.

COL ROCK:  Is this the original or a copy?

CPT SOMERS:  That's the original, sir.

(The offered exhibit was examined by counsel for the accused.)

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 112, Interview Worksheet on E. G. Casper.

CPT SOMERS:  The next offers five laboratory reports, four of them from the criminal investigation division laboratory of the United States Army and one from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, copies of which have been previously provided to the defense.

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, might I suggest we take them seriatim, one at a time, and identify them by date so we can all share these clearly.

COL ROCK:  I plan to identify them separately, yes.

MR. SEGAL:  All right, sir.

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 113, FBI Fingerprint Report.  Government Exhibit 114, CID Lab Report, date returned 19 August 1970, reference hair samples.  G-115, CID Lab Report, date returned 22 August 1970, subject fingerprints.  G-116, CID Lab Report, date returned 1 September 1970, subject, fingerprints.  G-117, CID Lab Report, date 2 September 1970, subject fingerprint (Esquire).  Does the government have further exhibits to offer?

CPT SOMERS:  No further exhibits, sir.  We do have a witness.

COL ROCK:  Please --

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, excuse me.  Before we proceed with the witness, in my very rapid examination of the reports, I do not see any reference to a lab report that deals with the question of the wax that was found in the MacDonald house, and as to whether or not the apparently melted samples of wax were or were not of the same type as the candles that were found that belonged to the MacDonald family, and I want to inquire at this time as to whether we can anticipate such a report being available.

COL ROCK:  Does the government care to address that?

CPT SOMERS:  I do not currently have such a report.  I am told that the work has been done.  I intend to attempt within the deadline set by the investigating officer one more time to obtain that report.  You are correct; however, it is not in what you have now.

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, I would at this time inquire in regard to G-114, lab report of 19 August dealing with comparisons of hair of three individuals, Ivory, Orr and Rossi, with the samples of the hair found in Mrs. MacDonald's hands.  The response of the laboratory seems to be incomplete in that it says on the second page of the report that the sample hairs and hairs found in Mrs. MacDonald's hands apparently did not have a common source of origin, however, I call to the attention of the investigating officer the qualification that was previously put on a hair report submitted by the laboratory on 2 September in regard to the comparison with Captain MacDonald's hair, wherein which they had some nine samples of hair from different points of Captain MacDonald's body, and nevertheless concluded that perhaps they still could not make a final positive elimination of Captain MacDonald as the source of the hair in his wife's hand because they didn't have enough hair samples.  I would suggest that the laboratory be asked whether they wish to incorporate the same qualification or caveat that they placed in their prior report of 2 September in regard to the hair of Captain MacDonald, to this report dealing with Investigators Ivory, Orr and Rossi, and if not, I would like to know, sir, and perhaps I think the inquiry would like to know why such a qualification or caveat is not appended to the report that has been given us today.  Is there something unique about the hairs that make it unnecessary, is it an oversight or perhaps some other explanation, but I do think that the record does look rather strange in regard to the fact that on one of these hair reports there was this rather interesting qualification, wherein it has not been appended here, perhaps by oversight or some other inadvertence.  And I think that since we are waiting for one more report from the laboratory, it may be desirable to ask for their answer in that regard.

COL ROCK:  Does the government have any answer to this at this time?

CPT SOMERS:  The government has nothing to say with respect to -- in answer to that, because the government does not know why the lab has responded as it has.  I can obviously state why the laboratory responded in the other lab report because it was asked.  Beyond that I do not know.

MR. SEGAL:  Well, sir, I think from that, if we are to be in a sense complete, I know no reason why we should not ask the same question with regard to this report.  I don't see any reason why there should be unique and special treatment appended to the examination made in Captain MacDonald's hairs which require the government to have some caveat added to the laboratory report, and at the same time the thing was not done in regard to the other hair samples.  It may be, in fact, may be overlooking some evidentiary source, or may be excluding something which should not necessarily be excluded.

CPT SOMERS:  I can expand a little bit on the comparison of hair, if it's going to help anything.  But you may want to go off record to do it.

COL ROCK:  Well, I think the question has been asked on the record.  Is there any reason why we should go off the record?

CPT SOMERS:  None other than the source, i.e. me, instead of the lab technician.

COL ROCK:  Well, I have asked you for any elaboration you can give.  Obviously you can't speak for the lab, so please proceed.

CPT SOMERS:  Well, hair has physical characteristics which are identifiable.  If some of them are clearly different, then elimination can be made immediately.  Sometimes, however, the differences are not clear and are there, and a complete elimination is not possible.  That may be one of the explanations for the differences here.  In fact, I think it is.  That's my opinion.  But at any rate the lab has responded as it saw that it should respond with respect to these reports and I have not personally talked to the laboratory technician about every exhibit, in the current report, because we have only recently acquired them.

COL ROCK:  I would assume, then, basically from what's been stated, that the lab was requested not to give the additional caveat as in the case with Captain MacDonald, simply because these three are not the accuseds.  Would that also be the reason?

CPT SOMERS:  Well, I would reverse the -- the way of putting that and say that the lab would normally respond that way, and that it responded differently in the case of Captain MacDonald because we asked it to, since he is the accused.

COL ROCK:  It occurs to me, Mr. Segal, with my deadline of -- I believe it was by 1330 tomorrow -- all evidence would be in, that it would not give the lab sufficient time to answer and get the reports in in view of our past experience.  However, I would be willing to take into account that probably if the lab were, if an inquiry were made, they would probably answer in the same fashion that they have on this other one.  Would that be your impression, Captain Somers, that they would probably give the same?

CPT SOMERS:  They might very well, sir.  I can't say.

COL ROCK:  Because the answer to the government's inquiry didn't really add much, much to the investigation, if anything.

MR. SEGAL:  I'd except that clarification, sir.  I think that perhaps we might account that a different laboratory person wrote the report.  Mr. Browning did the one on 19 August and he chose to use the words different physically, and the other person said dissimilar.  It seems to me it is a minor difference that we can accept in view of your own clarification.

COL ROCK:  I have looked at it in that general light as well.

CPT SOMERS:  Well, I can get a reply to the question by telephone perhaps, if you are interested.

COL ROCK:  I think Mr. Segal is satisfied.

MR. SEGAL:  Yes, sir, I am.

COL ROCK:  Please bring in Mr. Ivory.

(Investigator William F. Ivory was called as a witness, was reminded of his prior oath, and testified as follows.)

Questions by CPT SOMERS:
Q  You are the same Mr. Ivory who has previously testified in these proceedings?
A  Yes, sir, I am.
Q  Mr. Ivory, I hand you Government Exhibit 105 and ask you if you recognize it?
A  Yes, I do.
Q  Can you tell us who that photograph represents?
A  It is a photograph of Miss Helene -- Helena Stoeckley.

MR. SEGAL:  I'm sorry; I could not hear that name.

A  Helena Stoeckley.
Q  And were you present when that photograph was taken?
A  Yes, sir, I was.
Q  Did you take it?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Is it an accurate representation of the person depicted?
A  Yes, sir, it is.
Q  Did you have an occasion to speak to Miss Stoeckley?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  Mr. Ivory, are you familiar with a person named Mr. William Posey?
A  I am familiar with the name, sir.
Q  Are you aware of any connection between Mr. Posey and Miss Stoeckley with respect to this case?
A  Yes, sir, I am.
Q  Can you tell us what that is?

MR. SEGAL:  I object.  I haven't the slightest idea what the source of Mr. Ivory's awareness is.  We do tolerate some hearsay, but at least we ought to have some idea as to how Mr. Ivory purports to know whether there is any connection between Miss Stoeckley and Mr. Posey or anybody else before he is permitted to testify to anything.

CPT SOMERS:  I think he has testified that he spoke to Miss Stoeckley, and I'll tie that in specifically, if you like, as her being the source of the information.

COL ROCK:  Yes, try to clarify, please, counselor.

Q  What is the source of your information with respect to this connection?
A  Verbal statements made to me by Miss Stoeckley.
Q  And what is that connection?
A  She said that she resided in the building next to Mr. Posey on -- the name of the street I don't recall offhand.  And that she was the female that he allegedly testified he saw coming out of the car that morning on 17 February.

MR. SEGAL:  That's objected to.  I haven't the slightest idea how Miss Stoeckley would say that Mr. Posey saw her getting out of the car.  There's no indication as to how she knows it, or any indication by Mr. Posey that he ever spoke to anybody that evening.  This is really getting remote.  There were a number of young ladies that lived at the address next door to Mr. Posey, including the apartment wherein Miss Stoeckley may have resided.  I believe there is trouble in allowing all this kind of testimony to come in through Mr. Ivory.

COL ROCK:  We'll take a temporary recess in place.

(The hearing recessed at 1515 hours, 9 September 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1521 hours, 9 September.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that those parties who were present at the recess are currently in the hearing room.  I again remind you, Mr. Ivory, you are under oath.

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, for the record, may I say in view of the discussion that was held in your absence, certain matters have been clarified.  There was an objection made by me and I am withdrawing it at this time in view of the clarification that we had.

COL ROCK:  Proceed, Captain Somers.

Q  Mr. Ivory, do you remember when this interview was that you had with Miss Stoeckley?
A  It was about two weeks ago, the date I don't remember.
Q  And where was it?
A  It may have been even further than that in time, but it was in the office of the Chief of Detectives in Fayetteville City Police.
Q  Now you say that Miss Stoeckley indicated that she was the girl that Mr. Posey was alluding to.  What information, specifically, did she convey that led to this conclusion?
A  She said that she had discussions with him, and also that she did arrive at her home at the time he alleges he saw her getting out of the car.  However, she said she was alone in the car.
Q  What kind of car was it?
A  A blue Mustang, a new model, or a late model in year and she did not remember that.
Q  Did she indicate, Mr. Ivory, how many people were with her?
A  She stated she was alone.  There were no persons with her at all.

CPT SOMERS:  Sir, I think I've pursued this as far as I want to.

COL ROCK:  Counsel for the accused?

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Mr. Ivory, I'm not sure I understand what she gave you, when she said she was alone in this blue Mustang.  Did she indicate to you that she is the person who drove the Mustang up?
A  Yes, she did say that.
Q  I see.  And who did she tell you was the owner of that car?
A  She knew the owner only by first name.  She did not know the last name.  It was an acquaintance of hers.
Q  And what was the first name?
A  Bruce.
Q  Bruce?  Did you make notes of your interview with Miss Stoeckley?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Did you make a note in your file or anything that you interviewed her?  
A  There may be a note reflecting the date.
Q  Is there any reason why you didn't make any notes of your interview with this lady?
A  No particular reason, no.
Q  Isn't it standard operating procedure when you are conducting an interview that's related to an Article 32 inquiry that is in process of a triple homicide to make notes of interviews taken?

CPT SOMERS:  I object.  That's irrelevant.

MR. SEGAL:  No, sir, it's not irrelevant.  I suggest it's very relevant.  If we are going to be confined to this Stoeckley -- you know -- statement, it would be very helpful to know why an investigator would not write down all she has said so that he might even be able to refresh his own recollection, that he might be able to share with us all of her words as he was taking them down contemporaneously.  It seems to me to be so elementary in procedure in criminal investigation as to defy even arguing its relevance.  It seems to me we are entitled to know why a report was not made of this interview.  Was it simply that the investigator treated it so lightly as a matter of so little importance to him that he did not trouble to take notes or is there some other reason?  I think we are entitled to have that if we are going to bring out this testimony at all.

CPT BEALE:  Your objection is overruled, Captain Somers.  You made proceed, answer the question, if you can.

Q  Mr. Ivory, why were no notes taken of the interview with Miss Stoeckley?
A  I did have a notebook with me, and I started to take notes and she got very nervous and shied away, and I put my pen and notebook away.
Q  Did you make any notes at all in your notebook?
A  I just started -- I believe I wrote her name down at the top of the page.
Q  And what did she do or say to indicate that she was objecting to your making notes of what she was saying?
A  She said something to the effect of what are you doing?  What are you writing?
Q  And what did you say?
A  I said, "nothing, I'm not writing anything," and I just put it down.
Q  Did you ask her whether she objected to your making notes of the interview?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Why not?
A  I was concerned with getting over with the interview, rather than making her so nervous that she would not answer me at all.
Q  What was so terrible about making her nervous about asking her about her whereabouts on the morning of the 27th?
A  I don't know and that's why I put the notebook away so I could find out, so I could find out what she had to say.
Q  Did you find out where she was between the hours of 2 a.m. and 4 a.m. on February 17th 1970?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Did you ask her where she was?
A  I did.
Q  What, if anything, did she say?
A  She said she could not recall, she could not remember.
Q  Did she indicate any reason why she was unable to recall?
A  Yes, sir, she did.
Q  And what was the reason?
A  She said that she had been out on marijuana.
Q  On marijuana?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Are those her words, that she was on marijuana?
A  That's correct.
Q  Mr. Ivory, you -- was she telling you that she couldn't remember where she was because she'd been using marijuana?
A  That's correct.
Q  Mr. Ivory, you've had occasion to investigate cases in which cannabis sativa has been used, haven't you?
A  Yes, I have.
Q  Do you know to your knowledge, is that a medically recognized result of smoking marijuana, to lose memory?
A  Not to my knowledge.
Q  Not to your knowledge.  Were you told by anyone that Mr. Posey had previously said that Miss Stoeckley said she had been taking, at one time she said LSD and another time she said mescaline?  No one ever told you that?
A  Would you go over that again, please?
Q  Had anyone ever told you that Miss Stoeckley was reported to have said on one occasion she was using mescaline that night and on another occasion she reported to have said LSD that night?
A  She told me in that interview she was taking marijuana.
Q  Well, I want to know, were you armed with the information --
A  No, I was not.
Q  Now did you ask Miss Stoeckley why she was not able to recall where she was since marijuana is not known to have the effect of impairing one's memory?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And she said what?
A  She said she didn't know, she just couldn't remember.
Q  Now what color is Miss Stoeckley's hair?
A  Red.
Q  Would you say it was dark red?
A  Yes.
Q  Did you ask her about a blonde wig?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And did she admit to having owned a blonde wig up until about February 17th?
A  I asked her specifically about the blonde wig, and she said that she had worn one occasionally, but that it was not hers, that it belonged to a girlfriend and she did not have it.
Q  And did she say when she returned or disposed of that blonde wig?
A  No, she did not.
Q  Did anyone ask her whether it had been shortly after February 17th, 1970?
A  It was subsequent to that date, but the exact date she couldn't recall.
Q  And did she give the name of the girl?
A  No, she did not.
Q  Did you ask for that name?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  Did she refuse to give you that name?
A  No, she said she just couldn't recall which of the girls it belonged to.
Q  Did she tell you where it was that she had effected the return of the wig, the street, or apartment, where the other girl lived?
A  No, she did not.
Q  Did you ask her where it was?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Did you ask her whether she had ever owned a large floppy hat?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  What, if anything, did she say about that?
A  She said yes she did.
Q  Did she indicate where that hat is now?
A  She indicated she gave it to someone, but she could not recall the name of the person she gave it to.
Q  And did she indicate where that episode in giving the hat away took place shortly after February 17th 1970?
A  She did not indicate the day, nor did I ask.
Q  Was there any reason why you didn't ask her when she stopped wearing or got rid of it?
A  No particular reason.
Q  Did you ask her whether she owned boots of any sort?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And what did she say?
A  She said, yes, she did.
Q  And does she still own or wear leather boots?
A  Yes, she does.
Q  Did she have them on the day you saw her?
A  No, she did not.
Q  Did she describe to you what color they were?
A  She -- the color she had around that period were black.
Q  What do you mean "around that period?"  Did she indicate that she owned more than one pair of boots?
A  Yes.
Q  Did she ever indicate to you she owned brown boots?
A  No.
Q  What colors did she indicate she owned?
A  Black.
Q  Just black?
A  Black.
Q  Were they -- do you know anything about the type of boots they were?  Were they large boots, large openings at the top, or were they boots that had to be zipped up because they were tight to the leg?
A  I do not know what type.  She indicated they came to about this portion on her leg, which will be maybe two or so inches below the knee.
Q  Did she indicate to you that she had given away or disposed of any pair of boots about the middle of February 1970?
A  Yes, she did.
Q  What did she say in that regard?
A  She said she threw them away.
Q  And did she know where she threw them away?
A  Yes, she threw -- she indicated that the heel was worn or broken from her boots, and since she had another pair of boots, she discarded them in a trash can.
Q  Now, did you ask Mis Stoeckley whether she would be willing to come here to this inquiry and tell us what she knew about her whereabouts of February 17th, 1970?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And what, if anything, did she say?
A  She said no, she would not.
Q  Did you ask her why she would not come?
A  She indicated she didn't want to become involved.

COL ROCK:  I'm sorry.  She didn't want what?

WITNESS:  To become involved.

Q  May I ask how she came to be in the office of the Chief of Detectives of the Fayetteville Police.
A  I had asked the detectives to be on the lookout for her and if they got her to call me so I could talk to her.
Q  She was picked up by the Fayetteville Police?
A  Let's not say "picked up."  She was asked to come in to talk to us.
Q  Well, is there any reason why you couldn't ask her the same way the Fayetteville Police did?
A  I did not know where she was living.
Q  Once she arrived at the police headquarters at a request, was there any reason why you couldn't make the same type request that she appear at these proceedings?
A  I asked her would she be willing to go to court, I did not specifically say Article 32 but court, and she said no, she would not.
Q  Did you talk to her about her interest in witchcraft?
A  No.  The subject came up, yes.
Q  In what fashion did it come up?
A  I asked her what type dress she usually wore.  She said sometimes purple, sometimes black.
Q  What color of clothing was she wearing when you saw her?
A  Purple.
Q  Was she wearing a skirt or dress?
A  She was wearing a pants suit.
Q  Pants?
A  Suit.
Q  Pants suit?
A  Yes.
Q  What kind of footgear did she have on?
A  Shoes.
Q  What?
A  Shoes.
Q  Where does she live today?
A  I have no idea where she is now.
Q  All right, may I ask the date that you saw her in the Fayetteville Police Department, what was her address on that date?
A  She gave an address on Arsenal Avenue.
Q  And what was that address, please?
A  909.
Q  909 Arsenal Avenue?  Have you ever verified that address as to whether in fact she resided there?
A  I have been to the house but I've never found her at the house.
Q  You mean subsequent to the day you talked to her in the police station, you've been there.  Is that right?
A  That's right.
Q  How long after that date did you go to her house to see whether she was there?
A  Oh, it was weeks, a few weeks.
Q  Well, you only talked to her about two weeks ago, I think.
A  Right, I believe I corrected myself later and said that I believe it might have been earlier, which is a few weeks.
Q  All right, let me ask you this.  Did the interview of Miss Stoeckley take place before or after the last time these Article 32 proceedings convened, which was the second week of August I believe?
A  It would have been subsequent to that.
Q  Subsequent.  Did you ascertain she lived at the address at Arsenal Street that she gave you?
A  No, I did not.  That is the address that she gives around town as being her address.
Q  Well, did you talk to anyone at that address?
A  I talked to a woman at that address.
Q  And did she say that Miss Stoeckley lived there?
A  She was being very cagey with me and would not answer.  She answered, but --
Q  What did the woman say when you said, "Is Helena Stoeckley living here?"
A  She said, "No, I don't know anyone by that name."
Q  In other words, she denied knowing Helena Stoeckley?
A  Yes, at that time.
Q  Did you ask her whether she knew anybody by the name of Helena?
A  No.
Q  Did you show her the Polaroid photograph that you have here and say is that the lady that lives in the house perhaps by some other name?
A  I did not have in my possession the picture at that time.
Q  Have you ever gone back subsequently with the photograph and showed it to the lady to see whether Helena Stoeckley lives at 909 Arsenal Street?
A  No, I haven't.
Q  Do you know where the Fayetteville Police picked her up on the day that you interviewed her?
A  No, I do not.
Q  You have no idea how they found her?
A  No idea in the world.
Q  Do you know whether Helena Stoeckley has been fingerprinted by the Fayetteville Police?
A  By the Fayetteville Police, I'm sure she has.
Q  Well, why are you sure that she has been fingerprinted?
A  Because she was arrested.
Q  Do you know when she was arrested?
A  Yes, around the end of the month.
Q  The end of the month of --
A  Last month.
Q  July or August?  The end of August?
A  Correct.
Q  What was she charged with?
A  Trespassing.
Q  Is it normal to fingerprint people here in Fayetteville when they are charged with trespassing?
A  When anyone is put in jail, to my knowledge, sir, they are fingerprinted.
Q  Do you have specific knowledge of whether Fayetteville Police --
A  If they follow their usual procedures, yes.
Q  Do you know whether there is a set of prints of Helena Stoeckley in the Fayetteville Police files prior to August of 1970?
A  I do not know.
Q  Do you know whether she was arrested prior to August 1970 at any time?
A  I know she was arrested but I don't know whether she was put in jail or not.
Q  Well, where was she arrested prior to August 1970?
A  I don't know.  I don't know any of the details of that.
Q  Did you ask to see whether you could get a set of her fingerprints prior to August 1970?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Was there any reason why you didn't ask for fingerprints?
A  No reason, sir.  I had already obtained a set of fingerprints.
Q  When did you obtain a set of fingerprints?
A  They were obtained on 19 February by the Federal Bureau.
Q  A set of her fingerprints?
A  Yes, however under an alias.
Q  What was that alias?
A  I don't know.
Q  You say you do not know the alias under which she was previously arrested.  Can you find that out for us, sir?
A  She was using several aliases.
Q  What aliases does she use?
A  Margie Raynor.
Q  Raynor?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What else, sir?
A  Margie Foster.
Q  Do you know any others?
A  Those are the only full names that I know.
Q  Do you know how old this young lady is?
A  I believe she is around eighteen years.
Q  Did you discuss with her whether she used LSD?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Dif you address with her whether she regularly used any form of drugs?
A  Let me correct myself.  Yes, I did.
Q  What, if anything, did she say in regard to her use of drugs?
A  She said she had tried marijuana and I believe she had tried LSD.
Q  When you say tried; did she tell you that she used LSD on a hundred or more occasions?
A  No, she did not.
Q  Did she indicate to you on how may occasions she used LSD?
A  No, she did not.
Q  Did she give you the names of the other young ladies with whom she lived in the building next door to where Mr. Posey lived?
A  No, she did not.  She gave me --
Q  Excuse me.
A  She gave the first name Marie.
Q  As one of the girls with whom she lived?
A  Yes.
Q  And what about the second girl with whom she lived?  Did she give you any other names?
A  She said she did not remember the girl's name.
Q  Did you ask Miss Stoeckley what her relationship is with the person by the name of Paul Bowman?
A  Paul Bowman?  The name is familiar but I -- I can't relate it to that conversation.
Q  I believe Paul Bowman would be known to the Fayetteville Police as a person who is suspected as dealing in narcotics.  Perhaps his name is known to you in that connection too.  Did you ask Miss Stoeckley anything about her -- who her associates were, male associates?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  Were the answers as vague as all the other answers, by first names?
A  First names, yes, sir.
Q  Did she tell you what is the last thing she can remember doing prior to 4 a.m. on February 17th?
A  Yes, leaving the house she was living in alone, and driving in the car, just driving aimlessly, she said.
Q  Did she have any idea about what time it was she left the house?
A  Sometime -- midnight or after.
Q  Did she indicate how she fixed the time when she left the house?
A  No, just knew in her mind that it was midnight or after.
Q  You mean she knew in her mind or that's all she chose to tell?
A  Well, that's what she told me.
Q  Did you ask for the description of the owner of that blue Mustang she was driving?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And what, if anything, did she tell you in that regard?
A  He was a white male, former enlisted man in the Army, and she couldn't go into more specific details, other than the physical description.
Q  Did you ask her any questions about specific identification points?
A  I asked her to describe the man to me as best she could, and she said he was twenty or under and a white male, dark hair.
Q  Did you ask her any other questions in regard to the identification of that person, or the description of that person?
A  That's all she could furnish me, in any way of a description.
Q  But did you ask her any specific points of identification?
A  Yes, sir, I asked her to describe any facial features, et cetera.
Q  Is it fair to say that's the only type of question you put to her?
A  Yes, she just could give me a general description.
Q  When you say she could just give you, you mean she could or that's all she chose to give you?
A  I couldn't read her mind.  That's what she gave me.
Q  How about her manner of demeanor?  Did she strike you as being frank, candid and open?
A  Yes, she struck me as being frank.
Q  Candid and open.  Is that right?
A  Right.
Q  And you though a person who did not know the names of the persons she lived with as being frank, candid and open?
A  Yes.
Q  And you thought that her inability to tell you the last name of the owner of the automobile that she used for the evening was also frank, candid and open?
A  Yes.
Q  And you thought that her telling you that she could not remember where she was for approximately four hours, because she was smoking marijuana is a frank, candid and open answer?
A  That's the answer she gave me, and I couldn't get anything else.
Q  Well, I appreciate your difficulty in the interview, Mr. Ivory.  I don't underestimate that for a moment.  What I am asking you is did you honestly take that as a frank, candid and open answer that she said because of marijuana she was not able to remember her whereabouts?
A  I could not -- I could only take it as face value as what she gave me.
Q  Well, the face value of that statement is a lie, since you know that marijuana doesn't have that effect on persons.
A  I've never tried it.  I do not know.
Q  Well, I didn't suggest that.  I said based upon your experience as an investigator, I am sure you've talked with physicians in regard to marijuana, the fact you are aware, I am sure, that marijuana does not -- is not reported in any way to effect the memory processes.
A  As far as I know.
Q  So knowing that, at least, you still felt that she was being frank, candid and open when she told you that she couldn't remember her whereabouts when she was smoking marijuana?
A  What else could I say?
Q  You could say that she was a liar and ask her to be more specific about what she was doing and where she was.
A  I possibly could have.
Q  But you did not, sir?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Did you ask Miss Stoeckley about her relationship with Mr. Posey?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And did she indicate that Mr. Posey had any grudge or malice against her that she knew of?
A  She couldn't understand why that he had -- had -- had -- she couldn't understand really why he had any -- she said that on occasion she had teased him about being square but that was the extent of her relationship with him.
Q  Did Miss Stoeckley admit or deny having a conversation with Mr. Posey on the street in August 1970, earlier last month, in the Haymount section of town?
A  No, I didn't query her about that.
Q  Were you aware that Mr. Posey had testified in these proceedings that he had seen Miss Stoeckley, if that's the right person that he talked to, on or about August the 12th of 1970?
A  No, I didn't know that.
Q  Were you told by anyone that Posey had said that he had seen Miss Stoeckley during the month of August?
A  No.
Q  As far as you know, when was the last time Mr. Posey is supposed to have been in the presence of Miss Stoeckley?
A  On dates she was -- if not vague, she just didn't know dates.
Q  Well, did you ask her when was the last time she saw Posey?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Was there any reason why you didn't ask her that?
A  No, no particular reason.
Q  You have no more information that you can give as to when she believes was the last time she was in Mr. Posey's company?
A  No.
Q  Did she indicate when she moved from the apartment next door to where Mr. Posey lived?
A  No, she did not.
Q  Did you ask her when?
A  No.
Q  Were you aware that Mr. Posey has said that she moved within a short period, maybe a matter of days or weeks, after the MacDonald episode, on February 17th?
A  No, I was not aware of this.
Q  And you did not ask her whether, you know, when she moved to the address at Arsenal Street?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Would you tell me, what was the purpose of your interviewing Miss Stoeckley?
A  To find out if, in fact, she was involved, or if there was any implication of her being involved in anything at Fort Bragg.
Q  You mean -- anything at Fort Bragg -- I assume you are talking about the MacDonald killings?
A  Correct.
Q  So you went there for the purpose of interrogating her as a possible suspect.  Is that right?
A  Correct.
Q  How long did this interview take place?
A  Oh, we were there for about an hour, I'd say.
Q  And how did your interview end?
A  It ended with that photograph being taken.
Q  With that particular photograph being taken.
A  Correct.
Q  In other words, that photograph is marked with that identification?
A  G-105.
Q  So that's a photograph that was in existence at the time we had our last hearing here August 10 through 15th of 1970?
A  Not recalling the date, I don't know if they were in session or not.
Q  Well, I suggest to you that the record will show that that photograph was marked into evidence during the week of August 10th through 15 of 1970, and that therefore you must have seen her, except your description of how these things took place prior to Monday, August the 10th, 1970.  Is that right, sir?  Would that be approximately right?
A  It had to have been -- it was -- if I could recall the date, I could say yes or no.  I don't recall the date I talked to her, but evidently it was before the picture was put in evidence.
Q  Now you specifically asked the assistance of Fayetteville Police to find this young lady for the purpose of questioning.  Is that right?
A  That's correct.
Q  Now you told us the only reason you wanted to question her was to see what her connection was with the MacDonald case.  Is that right?
A  Correct.
Q  What made her a suspect in your mind as a connection with the MacDonald case?
A  It came to my attention that she was the one that Mr. Posey had testified about.
Q  Well, if this photograph was introduced here in evidence during the week of the 10th through the 15th, Mr. Posey didn't testify until about the 13th of August, how could you have known about her prior to the 13th of August?
A  I'll have to take your word for these dates, counselor, because I just don't know.
Q  I think we have the transcript of the case available.  You mean on the basis of Mr. Posey's testimony that made this young lady a suspect.  Is that right?  What is it that made her a suspect?  Mr. Posey's testimony?
A  Correct.
Q  Now what have you done to check out the various explanations of stories this young lady gave you?
A  Well, it was so vague it was really not much background to be done on it.
Q  Did you make any attempt to find the blue Mustang she talked about?
A  Taking again her testimony, she said the man is now out of the Army and left the area.
Q  That was just her word.
A  Well, there are many blue Mustangs in that area.
Q  But, now, you know, Mr. Ivory, I really find it very difficult to accept the idea that you listened to this lady's statements point-blank and said that's it, and wrote her off as a suspect in this case.  Is that what you did?

CPT SOMERS:  I object.  Now the counsel is admonishing the witness and verging on badgering the witness.  If he wishes to ask questions let him ask questions, but to lecture the witness, I object to that.

MR. SEGAL:  Let me say this, sir.  Captain Somers is perfectly right, except that it really -- it really asks a great deal, and I would like to cut the red tape and if Mr. Ivory can just explain to me whether it is just standard to take a series of, you know, very vague explanations and say, oh, well, that's the end of it.  We won't be able to check this person out in a triple murder case, or whether there is some other reason.  It just begets all sensibility to think this is the way investigations are handled.  They are not handled this way.  In my career, sir, I have been involved in over 500 murder cases.  I've represented 7,000 defendants in 13 years and I have never heard of a true suspect being handled this way.  Now, there may be good reasons to disregard this young lady.  I think Mr. Ivory ought to be allowed to tell us now really why anything substantial hasn't been done to check out Helena Stoeckley and her explanations, which on their face, particularly this explanation about the marijuana is palpably unacceptable, and I think that the question is put for that purpose.  If it's really that offensive to everyone I will go about it in a different way.

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Segal, the form of your question was argumentative and I think it would be best if you would just stick to the normal procedure on cross-examination of asking the witness questions.

Q  Now you say this young lady was arrested for trespassing.  Is that right?
A  Correct.
Q  Do you have -- did the Fayetteville Police take an official police photograph in connection with that arrest?
A  I don't know.
Q  Is it the standard practice to do that?
A  I -- I imagine so.  Their ID bureau has both fingerprints and photos.
Q  Now where was it that she was trespassing?
A  At the Village Inn or Village Shoppe in the Haymount section of Fayetteville.
Q  Did you go back to the address next to Mr. Posey's house to make any inquiries?
A  I have never been there myself.
Q  Has anyone made any inquiries as to who are the persons who are on the lease in the apartment that this girl lived?
A  I'm sure they have, sir.
Q  Well, now why are you sure it has been done?
A  It seems like a rather elementary thing to do.
Q  I agree, sir, but what I ask you is --
A  I don't know, of my own personal knowledge.
Q  To your knowledge, you don't know whether anybody has attempted to find who is on the lease for the apartment in which this girl used to live.
A  Of my own personal knowledge, no, sir.
Q  And of course, if there was such a person, that person could be cross-checked against some of Miss Stoeckley's explanations, could it not?
A  Correct.
Q  And would that seem to be an elementary procedure to follow?
A  That is correct.
Q  Now did you talk to any of the other residents of that building where she formally lived or in the immediate adjoining buildings?  To see about who might know something about her whereabouts or her activities.
A  I conducted no background investigation in that area.
Q  Well, I don't mean a background investigation.  What I am saying is what did you do to cross-check her story by checking with neighbors or people who lived in the building or the adjoining building?
A  I have done nothing.
Q  Is there any reason why not?
A  Well, time, some other things
Q  Has anybody checked the electric bill, gas bill and telephone bill for the particular apartment which this lady lived?
A  Of my own personal knowledge, I do not know.
Q  Are those frequently used sources of investigation to try and track down people to find out their activities?
A  Correct.
Q  A telephone bill might reveal long distance or toll calls which would be some interest, to who the person is calling, would it not?
A  Correct.
Q  To your knowledge that has not been done in this particular case of Miss Stoeckley.  Is it fair to say that on the basis of what has been done up to now, it could not be considered that the investigation of Miss Stoeckley's whereabouts on February 17th is complete in any fashion?
A  It is not complete.
Q  It would require a considerable amount of additional work to check out a lot of her explanations and statements, would it not?
A  That's correct.
Q  And what effort is being made, if any, to your knowledge to check out her various statements and explanations?
A  Well, in one regard is trying to contact her again and talk to her, which has been unsuccessful.
Q  Well, what about any efforts being made to find the person she lived with, or to find neighbors and other persons who lived nearby to discuss her activities?
A  I have not personally done this.
Q  Do not the Fayetteville Police, when they make a file on a suspect or an accused person, also make notations of known associates and accomplices of an individual?
A  I do not know.
Q  Is that a frequently used police practice?
A  I do not know.
Q  To keep a record of associates and accomplices.  You are not familiar with that practice?
A  In major criminals, yes, but not in petty type criminals.
Q  Is drug dealing a major or minor offense to the Fayetteville police?
A  I don't know whether she is drug dealing or not.
Q  Did you ask her whether she dealt in drugs?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Is there any reason why not?
A  I correct myself.  I did.  I asked her if she was a dealer and she said no.
Q  Did you ask her if she ever sold drugs?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And what did she say?
A  She said no, she did not deal in drugs.
Q  Did you tell her that Mr. Posey said that thirty or forty people a night was seen to come and stay a short period and leave her residence?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Were you told by anyone that Mr. Posey gave such information?
A  She, herself, told me that they had frequent visitors.
Q  Frequent.  Did you ask her whether she had any black individuals who visited her apartment or home?
A  On occasions, yes.
Q  I beg your pardon?
A  On occasion.
Q  Did you ask her that question?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And she said on occasions?
A  Yes.
Q  Did you ask her the names of those persons, Mr. Ivory?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And what did she say about that?
A  She could not furnish me a name except for one first name.
Q  And what was that first name?
A  Eddie.
Q  And the other persons who were black persons, she couldn't give you any first names.  Is that right?
A  That's correct.
Q  And did you consider that answer to be frank, candid and open, sir?
A  Taking into consideration the type of people that hung around in that area, yes.
Q  What type of people are you talking about?
A  They don't go for anything but first names, nicknames.
Q  You mean they won't give outsiders that information?
A  Correct.
Q  You are an outsider?
A  Correct.
Q  So you really can't say to us that Miss Stoeckley was being frank, open and candid.  She was following her rules which are not to tell outsiders who her friends and associates were.
A  She said to me she only knew them by their first names.
Q  Of course the telephone company, gas company and electric company and landlords don't general function on the basis of just first names only, do they?
A  That's correct.
Q  That avenue of investigation might produce last names, might it not?
A  That's correct.
Q  Have you ever talked to Mr. Posey?
A  No, I have not.
Q  Is there any reason why you did not interview him about the facts that he possesses in regard to what Miss Stoeckley has told him?
A  I believe he was interviewed by some other person in my office whose name I cannot give you right now.  I do not know right now.  I did not personally interview him.
Q  Well, were you ever told about what the substance of Mr. Posey's interview was?
A  Yes.
Q  Who told you about it?
A  Mr. Grebner, I am sure.
Q  And that was before or after you talked to Miss Stoeckley?
A  It was before.
Q  Did Miss Stoeckley indicate to you why she had all of this unusual amount of traffic in and out of her house?
A  She said just people coming in, just a communal-type house, the way she described it, people would come and go, some she knew, some she did not.
Q  And what if anything did they do when they went to her house?
A  She did not say.
Q  Did you ask what they did?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And what did she say?
A  She said they'd go in -- well, to put it in English -- she said they'd go in and talk.  She said they'd go in and rap.
Q  Well, I don't think I ever got an answer as to the question about her interest or involvement in witchcraft.  But you did question Miss Stoeckley in that area?
A  To an extent, yes.
Q  Well, what was she asked to explain or tell?
A  I asked her why she -- well, when she was explaining the type of dress that she wore, sometimes black, sometimes purple, she said, "Yes, I dress like that because I -- the people there consider me a benevolent witch."
Q  Did you ask her what she meant by that?
A  Yes, she said the good witch as opposed to the witching practices of black magic.
Q  You mean she does affirmatively good things for her friends through her so-called powers?
A  She didn't say she had any powers.
Q  Did you ask her whether she thought she had any magical powers that she was practicing good things through witchcraft for her friends?
A  I asked her if she was serious about this and she said, "No, I'm really not a witch.  It's just what people say."
Q  That's just what people say about her?
A  Yes.
Q  And she modestly declined to determine whether she was a witch or not?
A  Yes.
Q  Does that strike you as a rather unusual conversation you were having with her?
A  No.
Q  It was not?
A  No.
Q  Normal kind of a freaky conversation you have with hippies, right?
A  That's right.
Q  Hippies are particularly trustworthy, truthful people?
A  Some.  Some are not.
Q  I beg your pardon?
A  Some.  Some are not.
Q  Normally, do you consider that to be the characteristics of people you are dealing with?
A  Depending on the type of person.
Q  Did you ask Miss Stoeckley about why she sat on her porch on the day the MacDonald family was buried wearing black clothes and with a wreath on her front porch?
A  There was no mention made of a wreath.  She said she was dressed in black simply because she sometimes dressed in black.  She attached no significance or no relationship between the two.
Q  Well, how did she happen to remember that she was wearing black the day the MacDonald family was buried?
A  I believe she said she read a newspaper article about it.
Q  Well, how did that part of the conversation come up, Mr. Ivory?  In other words, did you ask her what she was doing on the day of the MacDonald family funeral?
A  I asked her if she had, in fact, been wearing black on that date, and she said it's very possible and probably yes, because she'd sometimes wears black and sometimes wears purple.
Q  Did you ask her why she knew the date of the MacDonald family funeral and why she should recall what she was wearing?
A  I believe she said she heard it on TV, radio, that it was widely publicized in this area.
Q  And she recalled that?
A  Yes, she recalled a lot, that's how she knew where she was that morning because of the news broadcast.
Q  Why did you go to look for her at Arsenal Street?
A  I beg your pardon?
Q  Why did you go looking for her recently at 909 Arsenal Street?
A  To cover the same line of questioning again.
Q  You mean you were going to repeat the whole discussion again with her?
A  That's correct.
Q  Without having done any independent investigation to perhaps confront her with inconsistency in her story?
A  That's correct.
Q  What did you hope to gain by asking her to repeat the story without having anything to confront her with?
A  To see if she would tell us the same story again.
Q  And then suppose she didn't tell the same story again.  Then what would you do?
A  Take that step when we came to it.
Q  Well, what would the step be?
A  To go further into it.
Q  To do what, sir?
A  To go further into her story.
Q  What would you do to go further into her story?

COL ROCK:  Counselor, I don't quite follow this line of questioning.  Now this is getting beyond what we are trying to get from this gentleman.  I want to know what you are attempting to gain here by this, if you pursue it further.

MR. SEGAL:  Well, sir, I am interested, and I think it is a matter of some importance, as to why no independent steps were taken to check out the story to confront the witness, which is the standard technique, because when he says, he's going to talk to her again, have the same story told possibly, and then check it out.  Why does he have to have it told twice is my question, sir, before you do an investigation on it.

COL ROCK:  Well, I think he's already answered that.  Let's go to another line of questioning.

MR. SEGAL:  I have nothing further at this time, sir.

Questions by CPT SOMERS:
Q  Mr. Ivory, are you the only investigator that has anything to do with the investigation of Miss Stoeckley?
A  No, I am not.
Q  Do you know, sir, whether Miss Stoeckley was cooperating with and working for the local police?
A  Yes, she was.
Q  And in what way was she cooperating and working for them?  I'm not asking you the specific details or anything else.  Can you tell us the nature?
A  Well, she was offering them information.
Q  Among the hippie element, or among the drug using element as you know it, is it common to use full names?
A  No, no, it's not common.
Q  Mr. Ivory, is it uncommon for people in this section, in this element, to move their residence?
A  Very frequently it is.

CPT SOMERS:  Sir, because of the disclosure of Mr. Ivory, with the respect to the cooperation of Miss Stoeckley with the local police, I would ask that an instruction be given to all personnel in the room that Miss Stoeckley's name be kept in as much confidence as possible for the same reason that this same request has been made by the defense with respect to other people.

COL ROCK:  Was any promise given to her, Mr. Ivory, at the time you were interviewing her that her name would be protected in any fashion or any promises given to her?

WITNESS:  Not her name, but if her position with the police were known, her life would be in jeopardy.

CPT SOMERS:  Sir, I'm not asking the investigating officer or this hearing become responsible for her.  Simply that we treat her name with utmost caution.

COL ROCK:  So much of the testimony as pertains to her activities as a police informer will not be provided outside of this room.  Are you finished with your questioning?

CPT SOMERS:  I have no further questions.

COL ROCK:  I have a couple of questions, please, Mr. Ivory.

Questions by COL ROCK:

COL ROCK:  How many times have you interviewed her?

WITNESS:  I have seen her on two occasions.

COL ROCK:  Now, the questions that have been answered here, do they pertain to one time that you interviewed her or two times?

WITNESS:  The first time I interviewed her.

COL ROCK:  The first time you interviewed her?  And that was sometime during the month of August?

WITNESS:  The best I can recall, yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  And you say that was the first time you interviewed her?  What we've been discussing here today?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Approximately how much later was the second time you interviewed her?

WITNESS:  Some weeks, sir.  It was -- it was after she was arrested for trespassing.

COL ROCK:  Now the first time that she was interviewed, as I understand it, by you, she was picked up at your request so that you could interview her.  Is that correct?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.  Well, picked up comes to my mind as being arrested.  She was asked to come into the police station and talk to me.

COL ROCK:  She was asked?

WITNESS:  Right.

COL ROCK:  And she came in willing?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Did she appear to be under the influence of any drugs as far as you could tell?

WITNESS:  As far as I could tell, no, sir.

COL ROCK:  Did she appear at the appointed place at the appointed time that had been agreed upon previously?

WITNESS:  There was no appointed times.  They said when they could contact her they would call me.

COL ROCK:  To your knowledge she was not under arrest or any type of detention?

WITNESS:  No she was not.

COL ROCK:  And this interview lasted approximately how long?

WITNESS:  About an hour, sir.

COL ROCK:  And was the photograph taken at the end of that interview?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Now the second time that you interviewed her was when she was under arrest for trespassing?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Approximately how long did that interview last?

WITNESS:  Thirty minutes to an hour.

COL ROCK:  Did you ask her generally the same questions in the second interview as you asked her at the first interview?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Was this designed to try to determine whether there was any variance in her story?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Was there any significant variance?

WITNESS:  No, sir.  This was again to see if she would come here and testify.

COL ROCK:  Do you know of your own knowledge whether either the Fayetteville Police, the FBI or any agencies here at Fort Bragg interviewed her shortly after the MacDonald murders?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir, the FBI did.

COL ROCK:  Do you know whether or not she apparently established an alibi that satisfied the FBI at that time?

WITNESS:  I don't recall the story she told but apparently they were satisfied with whatever she said.

COL ROCK:  When you say, "apparently satisfied," is that because no further evidence came out of that interview?

WITNESS:  That's right.

COL ROCK:  Have you had an opportunity to read that interview that the FBI had with her?

WITNESS:  No, sir, I have not.

COL ROCK:  Now I would like to at this time, gentlemen, to question Mr. Ivory in a very limited fashion on one specific aspect of prior testimony reference rubber gloves, and this query is limited to this one subject alone.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Ivory, do you have reason to know what type, if any, rubber gloves were located in the kitchen of the MacDonald house?

WITNESS:  Type?  The brand name?

COL ROCK:  No, composition.  That is, whether they were fur gloves or made out of leather, this type thing.

WITNESS:  Yes, sir, there were three type gloves found in there.

COL ROCK:  What types were they and where were they located?

WITNESS:  Behind the faucet of the kitchen sink, there were some household rubber gloves, dishwashing gloves.

COL ROCK:  Some?  How many?

WITNESS:  A pair.

COL ROCK:  A pair.

WITNESS:  On the -- to the right of the sink there was a closet type affair, and hanging on the outside was some hot pad gloves, two.

COL ROCK:  Did you see any rubber surgical type gloves near that faucet in the kitchen sink?

WITNESS:  Near the faucet, no, sir.

COL ROCK:  Did you see any on the counter tops of that kitchen?

WITNESS:  No, sir.

COL ROCK:  And approximately what time did you make these observations?

WITNESS:  This was the initial observation and observations I was continually making.

COL ROCK:  This was early on the morning of the 17th after your arrival?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir, and up until and including the arrival of the laboratory people.

COL ROCK:  With reference to prior testimony about pieces of surgical gloves, do you know whether any piece of surgical glove was found on or adjacent to the body of Colette MacDonald?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Where was that found?

WITNESS:  Close to the head, to the left of the body, near the left arm and head area.

COL ROCK:  And that was found by whom?

WITNESS:  Found by myself.

COL ROCK:  I have no further questions.  Does either counsel have questions?

CPT SOMERS:  I have none at this time, sir.

MR. SEGAL:  Yes, yes, I do, sir.

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  If I may treat first, Mr. Ivory, the last area of inquiry about the rubber gloves, we'll focus on that.  The pair of household gloves that was found behind the faucet on the sink, do you recall that they were yellow gloves?
A  Yes, I do.
Q  They were not the see-through type of gloves were they?  Is that right?
A  That's correct.
Q  The hot pad gloves you described.  Those are of a quilted type of material, are they not?  And they are not rubber in fashion?
A  Quilted, yes, sir.
Q  Now, did you observe a pair of surgical gloves in the utility room at any time?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Did you have occasion to be aware of the fact that there's a dryer or clothes dryer in the MacDonald house?
A  Yes.
Q  Do you know where that was located?
A  Yes, it was in the utility room.
Q  Did you observe any gloves of any type on top of the clothes dryer?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Did you observe surgical gloves on the drain board or the area of the table top in the kitchen adjoining the sink area -- not the table top, the counter top rather?
A  The only surgical gloves found in the kitchen were in the cabinet underneath the sink.
Q  Now do any of the photographs that were taken by the photographers brought there by the CID show the location of that piece of glove that you described as being found by Mrs. MacDonald's body?
A  Yes.
Q  The picture should depict the portion of the glove.  Is that right?
A  Yes, it does.
Q  Now I want to go back, if we may, to talk briefly about Miss Stoeckley again.  Now I understand you saw her the first time in the Fayetteville Police headquarters.  Is that right?
A  Right.
Q  Now I believe you told Colonel Rock that -- or you agreed with his characterization that she came willingly to the police headquarters.  Is that right?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now will you tell Colonel Rock, please, the circumstances of how the Fayetteville Police picked her up?
A  I have no idea of the circumstances.
Q  As a matter of fact, would it be accurate to say that the Fayetteville Police, acting upon the request of yourself or the CID, when they located her and picked her up, told her they wanted to see her at headquarters and drove her down to the police headquarters?
A  I do not know.  I was told -- I received a telephone call -- that she was going to be at the, or she was at the police station, could I be there.
Q  Do you know whether she was told at the time the officers picked her up that she did not have to come if she didn't want to, but they were asking her to come in, if she would, please?

CPT SOMERS:  I object.  He's answered these questions repeatedly.  He says he doesn't know how she was picked up.

MR. SEGAL:  It is something very specific.  I'm asking whether she was -- did he learn that she had certain statements made to her.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Segal, I am satisfied when the witness has said that he doesn't know how she arrived, whether she was under gunpoint or what.

MR. SEGAL:  Very well, sir.

Q  Mr. Ivory, do you know who the officers were who picked her up or detectives who picked her up?
A  The detectives who were there in the office when I got there were Detective Lieutenant Studer and Detective Beasley.
Q  To your knowledge, are they the officers who picked her up?
A  I have no idea.
Q  Those two officers that you just named, Lieutenant Beasley?  
A  Studer.
Q  And the other officer's name is?
A  Beasley.
Q  What particular unit of the Fayetteville Police are they associated with?
A  Detective Bureau.
Q  And do they handle narcotic cases on the whole?  Now did you ask Miss Stoeckley for the name of her boyfriend?
A  Her boyfriend?
Q  Yes.
A  No, I did not.
Q  Did you ask her whether she had a boyfriend, a regular fellow that she went with regularly or frequently?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Now you told us before that you asked her to describe the owner of the car and she gave you some general information.  Is that right?
A  That's correct.
Q  You didn't follow that up in any way, in any further questioning of her.  Am I correct in that regard?  You didn't follow up what she told in more specific questions about the description?
A  I tried, but she could give me no more specific information.
Q  And when you say you tried, do I understand that you asked her -- is there anything else you can tell us about his face?  And she was negative in that response?  
A  Yes, and do you know what unit he was in at Fort Bragg?
Q  I gather from that, therefore, that you did not ask whether the boy who owned the Mustang had a mustache?
A  No, I did not.
Q  Were you aware that Mr. Posey had testified here, and possibly told the CID independently that the owner of the blue Mustang was certainly the person who drove the blue Mustang frequently was a young man who had a mustache?
A  No, I did not know that.
Q  You told us that she was apparently apprehensive at the time that you commenced to make some notes.  Is that right?
A  Correct.
Q  What was her attitude when you asked her to stand up and have her photograph taken?
A  There were no problems there.
Q  Did you ask for her permission to do so, or did you tell her you were going to take her picture?
A  I asked if we could have a picture.
Q  And what did she say?
A  Yeah, sure.
Q  Now you say that she is cooperating with the Fayetteville Police?  Is that right?
A  That's correct.
Q  With the two officers whom you named when you arrived to see her?
A  I beg your pardon?
Q  Was it with the two officers that you named -- you named who was there when you saw her?
A  Among others, I believe, yes.
Q  Is it fair to say that the information that she may have given the Fayetteville Police dealt with narcotics?
A  I'd say so.
Q  Did you assume that?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  But as far as anything she told you, she said she had no knowledge about narcotics and didn't know about people dealing in narcotics?
A  I didn't say that.
Q  You didn't say that?
A  No, sir.
Q  Did she say she knew about people dealing in narcotics?  Did she?

CPT SOMERS:  I'd like to, at this point, object.  This information is -- with respect to how she has cooperated with the police and what information she may have given them -- is not relevant here, and for that reason I object to going into this field any further.

MR. SEGAL:  I want to make an offer of proof, if I may.

COL ROCK:  Proceed.

CPT BEALE:  Do you want to have the witness removed, or what?

MR. SEGAL:  I'd like Mr. Ivory to step out, please.

CPT BEALE:  Would you please step out, Mr. Ivory, and please don't discuss your testimony with anyone.

(The witness departed the hearing room.)

MR. SEGAL:  What I want to suggest, this line of questioning would develop is not the specific information she may have given.  I don't want to know who she's named or anything of that sort at all, but what I am suggesting is Lieutenant Studer and Sergeant Beasley are permanently assigned with the Fayetteville Police Department to narcotic work.  As a matter of fact, whatever information this young lady has given is most likely, in fact, it's related to narcotics.  It is my understand of at least what Mr. Ivory was willing to convey earlier, that this young lady seemed to be denying any activity on her own part, or very much knowledge about narcotics, other than she tried LSD and she has smoked marijuana, and I think we have a right to pursue that.  But it seems to me that's really not quite consistent with the general tone that was expressed to the investigator.  I think we are entitled to know further what was the motivation for her cooperation with the police.  Was it exchange for dropping of charges against her?  Was she a paid informer and thereby had a salary that came by her?  I think we are entitled to have that kind of background with regard to the police situation.  Finally, I want to know how the police contacted her since apparently -- well, we want to find her -- the CID is unable to locate her, but the police can for the purpose of getting information, have no difficulty in relating to her whenever they do, and how does she, we further want to know, how does she give the police information about people if apparently all that she ever knows is their first names?  I mean I consider that to be an answer that has some doubt to be accepted whether she has given all she knows to Mr. Ivory.  I think she gives all that she wants to, and we find out the police only gets the same information that supports the idea that she only knows first names, and the police have to beat the walls for Eddies, Bills and Bruces and that's why I think we can develop with Mr. Ivory in a rather short fashion.

CPT SOMERS:  Sir, the government strongly resists any delving into the question of the mechanics of the functioning of the narcotics section, whatever it may be composed of in the Fayetteville Police, and I can assure you that this information is not available from the Fayetteville Police directly, and will not ever thus be available to this hearing.  If the question is whether this -- whether not this witness -- but whether Miss Stoeckley knew people who used drugs or dealt in drugs, I think that question can be answered without delving into the mechanics of the Fayetteville narcotics arrangements.  However, I think that with respect to that issue, we have gone as far as we can and as far as we should and as far as there is any reason to go, and we strongly object to delving any further into it.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Segal, on that line of questioning I will ask Mr. Ivory one further question on this and then we go no further into the modus operandi of this particular young lady as to informing-type activities, if that's what it is.

COL ROCK:  Let the record reflect that Mr. Ivory is back in the hearing room.  Mr. Ivory, I again remind you, you are under oath.
     I want to ask one question and then this line of questioning will cease.
     Do you know of your own knowledge approximately when Helena became an informer?

WITNESS:  I have no idea.

COL ROCK:  All right, does counsel wish to follow another line of questioning?

MR. SEGAL:  Yes, sir.

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  When was it that you talked to Helena Stoeckley the second time?
A  The date again escapes me.  It was when she was arrested for trespassing.
Q  How was it that you came to know that she was arrested?  To know that she was in custody?
A  I was informed that she had been arrested because I had put the word out that I was looking for her.
Q  In other words, after the first interview you had with her, you wanted to find her the second time.  Is that right?
A  That's correct.
Q  You were unable to find her at 909 Arsenal Street?
A  Correct.
Q  Do I gather then you then told the Fayetteville Police that you were looking for this gal again?
A  Among other people, yes.

COL ROCK:  I'm sorry; I didn't understand your answer.

A  Yes.
Q  And who did you tell in the Fayetteville Police you wanted to see this young lady again?

CPT SOMERS:  I object.  I don't think that who he told specifically is relevant here and I don't think it is necessary here.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is sustained.

Q  You then received a call that she was in custody.  Is that right?
A  That is correct.
Q  And where did you see and interview Miss Stoeckley?
A  In the Cumberland County Jail.
Q  And how long did you say that interview took?
A  Thirty minutes to an hour.
Q  Now what were the questions you asked the second time?
A  Generally the same as I asked her the first time.
Q  I know you answered that before, but I would like a little more specificity.  Did you say, "Where were you on the night of February 17th?"
A  That is correct.
Q  And what did she say?
A  She told me the same as she did before; she was out in a blue Mustang.  She went driving, did not know where she was and did not remember where she went.
Q  Did you ask her whether she had been using narcotics or drugs of any sort that evening?
A  That's correct.
Q  And what did she say the second time?
A  She said she was on marijuana again.
Q  Did you confront her that time with the fact that marijuana does not affect the memory?
A  No, I didn't.
Q  In other words, you ran the story more or less the same way?
A  That's correct.
Q  Have you ever requested Mr. Caverly or any FBI agent to make available to you or give you the substance of any previous interviews that the FBI had with this young lady?
A  No, sir, we do not know under what alias, we do not know for sure under what alias she was picked up.
Q  Well, how do you know that the FBI interviewed her?
A  By visual identification, and her, she had just told me that she was picked up by the FBI on the 19th.
Q  Well, who made a visual identification of her picture?
A  One of the agents there.  I don't know if it was Caverly or Howard Bergan.  I do not know.
Q  You were told by one of the agents that they remembered interviewing this girl?
A  That's correct.
Q  Well, what effort did anybody make to get various aliases together and ask the FBI to look for her prior story?
A  I just don't know under what alias she was picked up.
Q  Doesn't the identification bureau of North Carolina and Fayetteville police record the names of all accused persons by their own names and the various aliases they have given previous times?
A  She has -- she can pick a name out of the air for an alias.
Q  Are you telling us there's no way of checking the alias under which she's been arrested before?
A  I gave you those names.
Q  Well, did you ask the FBI to check out the various names that you had for her prior statements?
A  Yes.
Q  You did ask?  Who'd you ask to do that?
A  I checked myself on the worksheets and so forth that they gave us.
Q  You mean the FBI gave you their files and you looked at them?
A  No, no, not a file.  A list of people that they picked up, and fingerprinted.
Q  The list of people they picked up and fingerprinted?
A  That's correct.
Q  And do you know whether on that -- how many names were on that list?
A  I couldn't guess.  It would be just a guess.
Q  Was it one sheet of paper?
A  It was one sheet of paper with some names on it.
Q  About how many names?
A  The names on the list I believe were presented in here.
Q  Were they all females or were there some males?
A  Male and female.
Q  Did you ask them to pull the female interviews sheets that were listed on this list of names?
A  Except for looking for hers, no.
Q  I don't understand the answer.  What I want to know is if you had a single sheet of paper with names on it that the FBI interviewed and some of them were females did you ask them to pull all the female interviews to check them out to see if you couldn't pick out Helena Stoeckley's prior interview with the Federal Bureau of Investigation?
A  No.
Q  Why not?
A  Because I did not know under what name she was picked up.
Q  But, again, sir, I say --

CPT SOMERS:  I object to this.

Q  Would there be a better way of checking if you read this story?

CPT SOMERS:  I object here.  I think the answers to this line of questioning are clear.  I suggest that this ground has been covered, that this is just getting repetitive, and it's also getting to be argumentative, therefore I object to this line of questioning being pursued any further.

MR. SEGAL:  I do not see it to be repetitive when I try to ask -- to ascertain why is it seemingly impossible to find from a single sheet of names those female names and then have those interviews pulled and read them and see whether you can't find Helena Stoeckley's interview.
     It does not seem to me as an act that is so extraordinary that on its face doesn't need explanation.  I think we are entitled to it.  I think it is quite apparent that in making a serious effort to locate somebody's prior statement which is so necessary so that it will be a simpler procedure.  If I thought there were hundreds of names I think it would be impracticable, of course, but not unworthy of effort in a triple murder case.  But this is not, as I gather from Mr. Ivory, that we are talking about a great volume of names.  I'd just like to know why a request wasn't made to just simply extract the female interviews and check them out.  I think, by the way, sir, that Mr. Ivory's last answer, which may not have been recorded, was that none of the stories resembled the story that he was told, would be of great significance, because if she was interviewed under any name and told a story that resembled the story she told, that is of a great meaningful kind of contradiction.

CPT SOMERS:  Mr. Ivory has answered the question as to why he did not do what the defense is suggesting, and he's answered it, and he's answered it.  He can only give the answer that he has to that question.  He can't invent one for the defense.  Furthermore, Mr. Ivory is a member of the CID, not the FBI, and the FBI files are not open to the general public, nor are they even open to the CID.  I object again to this line of questioning into, and request that it not be permitted to be continued.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Ivory, did you have occasion at this time to pull any files and read them to determine if you could find the information?

WITNESS:  No, sir.

COL ROCK:  You did not read any FBI files?

WITNESS:  No, sir.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Ivory, did you state earlier that none of the stories matched up?  Were you referring to stories in the FBI files or what?

WITNESS:  Just in conversation with agents from the FBI as to what she said and nothing of that nature had been reported on the morning when they were doing their interviews.

COL ROCK:  Let's move on to another line of questioning.
Q  Did you ever arrive at the conclusion that possibly she was lying about being interviewed by the FBI?

CPT SOMERS:  I object to this.  This is the same line of questioning, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Have you ever submitted a known set of fingerprints of Helena Stoeckley for comparison with the unidentified prints that were found in the MacDonald house?
A  With a name on the card of Helena Stoeckley, not -- no, I have not.
Q  To your knowledge, therefore, has Helena Stoeckley's fingerprints ever been checked out against the unidentified prints in the MacDonald house?
A  I can only go on what was told to me, that this girl was fingerprinted under an alias.
Q  I don't think that answers the question.  As far as you know, the fingerprints of Helena Stoeckley have not been compared with the unidentified prints as yet?
A  So far as I know, yes, they were.
Q  Under what name were the prints submitted?
A  I do not know.
Q  I beg your pardon?
A  I do not know.
Q  Who told you that her fingerprints were submitted?
A  I believe I stated that I was told that she was one of the persons who was picked up and fingerprinted, although it was not under the name that we know her by, either her own name or an alias that we know her by.
Q  But you also told us, sir, that the FBI agent who conducted the various interviews of people and fingerprinted, didn't find any story that resembled the one that you heard from Helena Stoeckley.  Didn't you say that, sir?

CPT SOMERS:  Objection, same grounds.

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, this is absolutely critical.  We have to pin together these pieces of evidence.  On one hand, there is the suggestion she was interviewed.  On the other hand there is the suggestion no FBI agent remembers her story that matches what she has said.  Now what in the world would be objectionable about trying to pin down this?  Either she is mistaken about being interviewed, or she may have been talked to by agents other than FBI agents.  She may have been talked to by the FBI and maybe she told a different story, but we cannot pin these two things together because of some fatuous objection, which has nothing to do with the truth seeking to put these two facts together, and we might as well call it quits in finding out whether Helena Stoeckley has any possible connection with this case.

CPT SOMERS:  The agent has answered with what knowledge he has.  He cannot, no matter how many times the question is put to him, answer with respect to information he does not have.  The defense has information that the FBI was involved.  If the defense would like to check with the FBI, fine, and they may be sure that I will check with the FBI too; however, this witness has answered as best he can, and I again put forth what the defense labels this fatuous objection.

COL ROCK:  It appears to me that Mr. Ivory has answered some questions here to indicate that somewhere he seems to have some knowledge that fingerprints of this female, under some name, apparently were in fact sent for examination.
     From what source do you have that information, if my statement is true?

WITNESS:  The Federal Bureau, sir.

COL ROCK:  From the Federal Bureau.  Now, in your mind it is the same girl, though it may be under some other name, but you don't know what name?

WITNESS:  That's correct, sir.

COL ROCK:  How do you get that impression that it is the same girl?

WITNESS:  Just by their telling me, yes, she was picked up, we know her.

COL ROCK:  I see.  And the FBI did send her fingerprints to the CID Lab to be checked out?

WITNESS:  No, sir, they sent them to us, and we in turn sent them to the lab.

COL ROCK:  But unfortunately you don't know under what name?

WITNESS:  No, sir.

COL ROCK:  So that it would appear, Mr. Segal, that in fact her prints have been checked with the prints there in the house and --

MR. SEGAL:  I'm not so sure that's the only conclusion.  If I may, sir, with your indulgence, ask Mr. Ivory -- you weren't given to believe by the FBI, were you, Mr. Ivory, that every person that they interviewed and talked with in connection with this case was fingerprinted?

A  Of a certain group, yes.
Q  Some of the people that they interviewed.  Is that right?
A  Yes.
Q  And the agents recall talking to Helena Stoeckley because you showed them her picture.  Is that right?
A  Yes.
Q  But nobody can swear positively that the FBI also took her fingerprints?
A  She was supposedly one of the group who were picked up in Fayetteville and they were all fingerprinted.
Q  What group are you talking about?
A  Shall we call them hippies?
Q  But, Mr. Ivory, I gather also that the same agent who gave you this information that she was one of the group of hippies in Fayetteville who were picked up and fingerprinted, those same agents who told you that they know of no story of any person they interviewed that compared with the one that you have heard from Miss Stoeckley.
A  That's correct.
Q  From that would you conclude that two different stories have been told to you by the same person whose name is Helena Stoeckley?

CPT SOMERS:  I object.  His conclusion as to that issue is irrelevant here.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

MR. SEGAL:  Well, it's not irrelevant, sir, in the sense that he needed to continue interviewing her to find conflicting stories, because apparently the logic of it is escapable -- that there are conflicting stories.

COL ROCK:  This hearing will be recessed temporarily.

(The hearing recessed at 1650 hours, 9 September 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1706 hours, 9 September 1970.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that Mr. Ivory is again on the witness stand.  I remind you, sir that you are under oath.

COL ROCK:  An objection had been raised, I believe, concerning the method of questioning initially, and I believe this has been resolved.  Is counsel for the accused ready to continue?

MR. SEGAL:  Yes, sir.

Q  Mr. Ivory, did you ask Miss Stoeckley whether she was in the MacDonald house on February 17th 1970?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  And what did she say?
A  She said no.
Q  She did not know?
A  She said no.
Q  No.  Did you ask her how she knew she wasn't there if she could not account for her whereabouts between midnight and four a.m.?
A  She said she does not know where the house was, she does not know Captain MacDonald, she knew nothing about it, and she's sure if she had been there she would have known it.
Q  Could she explain to you why she was sure that she would remember being there since she couldn't remember where she was at all?
A  I imagine she though if she was involved in what happened there she would most assuredly remember it.
Q  She felt that she would remember.  Is that right?
A  That's what I said.
Q  That's what she said?
A  That's what I said she said.
Q  Right.  Did you ask her why that would have been something that she would have remembered as opposed to just her whereabouts for four hours on that morning?
A  I don't remember if I asked her that specific thing, no.

MR. SEGAL:  I have nothing further.

CPT SOMERS:  No further questions.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Ivory, you are advised that you will discuss your testimony with no person other than counsel for the government or counsel for the accused.  You are excused.

MR. IVORY:  Sir, may I make a statement in regard to my testimony about Helena Stoeckley?  I'd like to restate, most emphatically, that if it is publicized in the newspapers or in any other way that she is, or what I testified her relation with the hippie community and her relation with the police department, she is most assuredly a dead woman, and I just want to make that perfectly clear.

COL ROCK:  How can you assure this hearing that she is a dead woman?

MR. IVORY:  Just knowing the type of people, and the people in particular specifically that she deals with.

COL ROCK:  In view of the nature of this particular testimony, and the unusual source, I would request that both counsel take into account the statement of the witness and excise due caution in the release of any information.
     You are excused, thank you, sir.

MR. SEGAL:  I want to ask Mr. Ivory one matter.  If I might ask your indulgence, Mr. Ivory, with regard to the last statement that he made, sir, in regard to the hearing.

CPT SOMERS:  I think I would object to going into this too much further.  What is the nature of this question?

MR. SEGAL:  I want to ask --

COL ROCK:  You are excused.

(The witness departed the hearing room.)

MR. SEGAL:  In view of Mr. Ivory's last statement, which seem to indicate he has some knowledge of the persons with whom this young lady is an associate of or deals with, I want to ask whether he has the names of any individual whom he believes are capable of committing, you know, the act that he suggested to be committed against this young lady if her name is revealed as being involved with the police, because if he doesn't pursue it, I'll certainly pursue it as to at least obtaining the photographs to see if these people have a connection.  I do not consider that to be a common episode, to say I know people capable of murdering a young lady if we discuss her activities.  That's all I am concerned about.  He seemed to indicate he had that kind of knowledge about people she was dealing with.

CPT SOMERS:  I interpreted his remark as meaning the nature of those people.  I think you will find that if he's asked, that's what he'll say.

COL ROCK:  This is certainly my interpretation.  I think perhaps he is alarmed as a result of certain other crimes that have been committed by so-called hippies in the hippie community as reported in the paper and he is perhaps associating this individual with that same type.  This is certainly the conclusion that I drew.  However, I am not adverse to asking him the specific question if you wish to pursue it.

MR. SEGAL:  If I may, sir.

COL ROCK:  Do you have any objection to him asking this one question?

CPT SOMERS:  What is the question?

COL ROCK:  The one that he was just raising about does he know the names of anybody in connection with this testimony regarding the MacDonald case.

CPT SOMERS:  I think he's already testified that he doesn't know any names in connection with this girl.

COL ROCK:  Well, I think so too.  So therefore there's not going to be anything lost by asking him.  Ask him to step back in and let's ask him this one question.

(Mr. Ivory returned to the hearing room.)

COL ROCK:  Mr. Ivory, if you would please be seated.  I remind you again that you are under oath.  In view of the statement that you made, a rather serious one, a rather serious charge implied of a potential action, counsel for the accused has one logical question to ask you now.

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Mr. Ivory, do you know specifically individuals which whom Helena Stoeckley is associated with or has dealt with who are persons you believe might try and kill her if her involvement with the police were known?
A  Yes.
Q  You do?
A  Yes.
Q  Is that a number of persons that you know of in your professional judgment who are capable of such an act?
A  Yes, sir.

CPT SOMERS:  Now I object unless there's -- this goes back into an area of the relationship, in the informal relationship, as being irrelevant to this particular proceeding.  Sir, I know that Mr. Ivory cannot give this information.  I know that he's going to have to refuse to give this information.

COL ROCK:  These names, Mr. Ivory, that you are aware of, is this in connection with threats for release of information on the MacDonald case, or is this with reference to threats for release of information having to do with drug traffic.

WITNESS:  The latter, sir.

COL ROCK:  The latter.  That will be all, Mr. Ivory.

WITNESS:  Thank you, sir.

(Witness saluted the investigating officer and departed the hearing room.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will be released until 0830 in the morning.

(The hearing recessed at 1717 hours, 9 September 1970.)
Webmaster note: 
The original stenographer's misspelling of Struder was corrected to Studer in this transcript.