Home | Contact | Media Room | Site Index
Cina L. Wong & Associates, Ltd. Court Qualified Document Examiner Cina L. Wong
On The Record with Greta Van Sustere

On The Record with Greta Van Susteren
Fox News Network

Martha Stewart imClone trial

This video requires Flash Player 8 or higher.

Beltway sniper attacks (MD, VA, DC)

This video requires Flash Player 8 or higher.

October 11, 2002

Interview with Dr. Michael Baden, Larry Kobilinsky, Cina Wong and John Cayton
Maryland/Washington, D.C./Virginia Beltway sniper attacks.


October 21, 2002
Interview with Mark Fuhrman, Cyril Wecht, Cina Wong and Joe Delcampo.
Update on Maryland/Washington, D.C./Virginia Beltway sniper attacks.
Copyright 2002 Financial Times Ltd.
(From Fox News Channel)
Byline: Greta Van Susteren

VAN SUSTEREN: Now we turn to catching the killer. Joining us from Spokane, Washington, former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman. A new TV movie based on his book, "Murder in Greenwich," comes out next month. In Baltimore, forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht. From Virginia Beach, Cina Wong, forensic handwriting analyst. And from Fort Lauderdale, former FBI agent Joe Delcampo. Welcome to all of you. Mark, first to you. I'm completely perplexed by the chief today, chief Moose here in Montgomery County. Earlier today, he said that he was preparing a response to the -- presumably, the sniper is the one communicating, and then later comes out and says could not hear, that the audio was unclear. Any thoughts? What do you discern from that?

MARK FUHRMAN, FORMER LAPD HOMICIDE DETECTIVE: Well, I'm not giving away anything that isn't pretty obvious to a lot of people with no law enforcement experience that I've talked to in the last several hours. Certainly, they thought that they had something they were going to respond to, but clearly, they wanted the sniper to contact them again to possibly get a read, a location on his phone. And that's pretty obvious. They wanted him to communicate again. They want maybe something, a longer dialogue, something that's a key, more background noise, something that they could work on. It's unfortunate, Greta -- there's one thing I don't like about this. Why do we even know about this? Why do we know about the message at the Ponderosa steakhouse? Why do we even know? This is stuff for a very small nucleus of detectives to work on. The public can't possibly work on this. Why do we even know?

VAN SUSTEREN: You know what I think it is, Mark, is I bet that that note left behind the Ponderosa, if, indeed -- I mean, you would -- obviously, you know, we don't know the contents of the note. But I think somehow the chief was unable to connect with the person who left the note and probably had to come out and use the media to accomplish that. So I think -- you know, it seems almost like the chief was sort of pushed into having to do that.

FUHRMAN: You know, I kind of disagree. You need a little patience in this. You know, everything is moving so fast. I think to slow it down is the best option here. You have the sniper communicating. You know he's watching the media. And then you go to the media and actually try to kind of hoodwink him, you know, first having your cards in this poker game very close, and then you give it away later, showing everybody your cards and still trying to make a bet. It just doesn't work that way. Be quiet. Make one communication when you really know what you're trying to glean from that press conference. Too many press conferences. And where is this information coming from? I mean, some of this information is coming from the very people on the task force. It's certainly not coming from the media. The media is being given this information. And why? I don't understand this.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Well, let's talk a little bit more about this letter. Cina, let me go to you. This note, or whatever it is behind the Ponderosa that was found on Saturday night, if it were handed to you, what would you do with it?

CINA WONG, HANDWRITING ANALYST: Well, the first thing I would do is definitely have the ink compared from the note to the ink on the tarot card to see what type of pen was used. For instance, when the ink is tested, we need -- we want to see if there's a consistency between the two. And every pen manufacturer, what they do is have tracers in the ink. So when you write, you're able to identify the type of pen and also the year that the ink was produced, which is very important. VAN SUSTEREN: What about comparing the handwriting to the tarot card that was found at that middle school in Maryland? Would that be something that you could do to identify that the same person wrote both, if, indeed, that occurred?

WONG: Yes, of course. There are many things you can tell from the handwriting, to also find if there's consistency between the note and also the tarot card. When you look at the handwriting, you look at the usage of space. The pressure is very important. People can try and change and disguise their handwriting, but the one thing that won't change is the pressure -- heavy downstrokes, light upstrokes. And sometimes it's reversed in certain writers. So that's another important issue. And also, as I mentioned before on your other show, to understand the handwriting, to see if it's written from a U.S. copybook form, the way we were taught to write. Or if it's not and the structure is different, then what handwriting examiners would do would be to take non-U.S. copybooks and look at it and try to determine which country this person was educated in. VAN SUSTEREN: Joe, to you. DNA, I suppose, if someone licked an envelope to seal it, and possible fingerprints on this letter?

JOE DELCAMPO, FORMER FBI AGENT: Possibly, Greta. Certainly, it seems like this individual is very intelligent, very smart. He certainly has eluded police up to this time. Potentially, he might have taken precautions not to lick it but used maybe a sponge or something, and also not to touch it with his bare hands. VAN SUSTEREN: Now, how do you actually pick up prints from paper, Joe?

DELCAMPO: Oh, there's a chemical process that they use in the lab to fume it, so that the latent prints that you cannot see with the naked eye are then visible through the process of fuming it. VAN SUSTEREN: Doctor Wecht, to you. Your thought about the fact that this, you know, note was left behind? I mean, I always -- I always engage you to talk beyond your expertise because you've been in so of these many investigations that, you know, we deputize you in so many parts of forensic science. What's your thought?

DR. CYRIL WECHT, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: Well, first of all, I agree with Mark Fuhrman completely on the fact that there is this continuing discourse, just as I thought some days ago about informing the world that there are going to be military aircraft hovering about. Was that something to share with us? If there's a discussion about posse comitatus, let Ashcroft and Rumsfeld and other people in the Department of Justice deal with it. With regard to this, I agree. Question document examination is important. DNA is important. Obviously, maybe even forensic linguistics to see the nature and the style of the language. I've got to tell you -- and you know more than I, and please correct me and stop me immediately if I'm wrong -- I'm not aware that there has been confirmation that this note is real. I'm not aware there's been confirmation that the tarot card is real. By "real," I mean that it emanated from the sniper. I wonder -- and we should soon be able to determine if the handwriting is very similar, essentially identical, between that which was written on this note. This guy, if, indeed, it is he, is diabolically clever. He's not so stupid as to continue... VAN SUSTEREN: And let me stop you right there. Let me stop you right there. We'll get to all those points. But I just want to say one thing before we take a quick break. You're right. We've not yet established that this tarot card and letter are both real. We're going to come back, and we'll talk about that. Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)


MOOSE: The person you called could not hear everything that you said. The audio was unclear, and we want to get it right. Call us back so that we can clearly understand. (END VIDEO CLIP)

VAN SUSTEREN: He's challenged the media. He's fought with the media. And now, finally, Chief Charles Moose using the media to communicate with the killer. We're back with former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman, forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht, forensic handwriting analyst Cina Wong and former FBI agent Joe Delcampo. Joe, to you. For the most part, many of the killings and the shootings were focused in the Washington, D.C., area. In fact, we have a killing in -- one killing in D.C., three in Virginia, in the area closer to Washington, five in Maryland. The one on Saturday night -- the shooting on Saturday night is farther south in Virginia. Is there anything that you can divine from this? Does this tell you anything at all?

DELCAMPO: Well, certainly, Greta, it would probably be just a guess, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the individual lives in the Washington, D.C., area. Potentially, he could live in an area south of the city, near where the last shooting took place. He could check into a hotel or something down there after an act is committed, after a shooting has happened, and kind of ride it out if there is a vehicle such as a white van that he is using. VAN SUSTEREN: Mark, what would you be doing if you were the -- you know, the detective on the street on this case? Now we have the shooting down, at least, in southern Virginia. I mean, what would you be doing? I mean, Joe mentions hotel. You check receipts, right?

FUHRMAN: Well, I think we could probably conclude that the one thing that this suspect's doing is he's manipulating over 1,000 police officers working this case, and he's doing it quite effectively. I think he's probably covering as many bases as they would. I can't criticize what they're doing because they're probably doing all they can. I think the biggest criticism is, you're not allowing -- you're probably not allowing a detective to call the shots. They're probably allowing captains, chiefs and commissioners to call the shots, which I think is a mistake. Let the detectives run this investigation because they do this all the time. And administrators coming in trying to lead in a way that you don't need leadership here, you need investigation. And I think the frustration has been expressed by detectives that it's kind of confusing right now, a lot of chaos, overlapping investigations and interviews. And I think you need detective to run this and not an administrator. VAN SUSTEREN: Where do you see the confusion? Because I thought there might be a little bit of sort of a disconnect between Maryland and Virginia today, when Virginia was having a press conference about the seizure down there, that they're not calling an arrest, of the two men in the white van, meanwhile, Chief Moose up here in Maryland was saying, you know, "We're going to respond." It almost seemed like they weren't on the same page. They seemed like inconsistent press conferences for some reason. Where do you see sort of the chaos?

FUHRMAN: Well, you know, you look at this, you've got six jurisdictions now trying to be overseen by a man that's a chief in Maryland. It's not going to happen. It's not going to work. You can't be on scene all the places all the time. You need to do something, and whether that means let the FBI coordinate this investigation -- you need to do something. There's got to be one person calling the shots. There's got to be one mind. And in my opinion, you've got to stop talking to the public. They're in fear, yes. You want to reduce their fear. I agree. But the only way to reduce that fear is to catch the sniper. By telling the sniper your every move, like the arrest of these two men in the van today -- you know, you have to ask the cooperation of the media to not film this, to not show SWAT officers staked out on a gas station. What does the sniper know now? Just what we know. They're staking out a lot of locations in and around where he's already hit that meet a geographical profile. This is not good information to put out. You've got to get some cooperation. You've got to downplay this. You don't do press conferences every two hours. VAN SUSTEREN: Doctor Wecht, to you. The man who's sitting in the hospital in Virginia -- tremendous -- I mean, as I listened to the doctor during press conference talk about his injuries -- that bullet, that size bullet causes a tremendous amount of injury, doesn't it. Is it more so than perhaps, you know -- I mean, is there something special about the .223?

WECHT: Well, no, no, no. There's much more powerful ammunition. This is quite effective. I showed you the other night the bullet itself. It's the ammunition used in M-16, the U.S. Army and NATO forces. With regard to the investigation -- we've talked about this before. We know how this victim was positioned when he was shot, and the previous victim, we know how she was positioned when she was shot. You can get the trajectory by measuring from the sole of the foot up to the point of entrance, and then the point of exit or, in the case of the gentleman in the hospital now, where the bullet was located, and of course, the tissue damage, seeing the trajectory inside the body. You work then back, and you take that trajectory and you go back and you keep going back, and you look for the lair. To my knowledge, I've only read or heard -- correct me if I'm wrong -- of one lair having been found in the 12 shootings. Those lair have to be ascertained. Those places have to be vacuumed. They have to be micro-searched. This man is not coming in on a cloud of smoke. This is not the guy, you know, from JonBenet Ramsey that came down the chimney on a cloud and disappeared in similar fashion. This is a human being... VAN SUSTEREN: And in fact, we're going to... WECHT: ... he is -- he's walking. He's driving. There's got to be something there. They're going to have to find some forensic evidence. VAN SUSTEREN: And in fact, we're going to ask the gentleman when we come back about tire treadmarks and how that may help in this investigation. We'll be right back. Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)


ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN: You can assume on a variety of levels the White House maintains close contact with the agencies, particularly on the case of the sniper, that we are working as -- the federal government, at the president's direction, has dedicated itself to working with local authorities so that we can arrest whoever is doing this as quickly as possible. (END VIDEO CLIP)

VAN SUSTEREN: Even the White House is working to catch the killer. We're back with former LAPD detective Mark Fuhrman, forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht, forensic handwriting analyst Cina Wong, and former FBI agent Joe Delcampo. Joe, I promised before we went to the break we were going to talk about tread marks. If someone were parked in a vehicle behind the woods, behind the podiatrist, and drives off, must leave something behind, right or wrong?

DELCAMPO: Correct. Possibly and hopefully would leave something, depending on the surface, Greta. If it's a soft surface like mud or sand or dirt and an impression is left there, we would be looking at tread dimensions, tread design, and also wear pattern of the tire. VAN SUSTEREN: Can you -- what do you do, narrow it down then to type of tire? I mean, I assume you can't narrow it down to the actual car, right, unless you have the car and can then do a comparison?

DELCAMPO: Exactly. You have the questioned tire tread there that you would first photograph. You would look at the design of the tread. And then, potentially, depending on what the design is, be able to identify the manufacturer, and, also, potentially, the type of car it's on. Say, if it's a new car, new car come out tires. Those tires are by the manufacturers put on those vehicles, and, if it is a newer vehicle, you could, potentially, if it's an SUV, identify whether or not it was a certain tire on a certain vehicle. Passenger vehicle, if it's a new vehicle, certain tire. VAN SUSTEREN: And I assume you could do the same sort of analysis for a bicycle tire, if the bicycle were the mode of escape, right?

DELCAMPO: I don't know as far as bicycle tires what the FBI labs or state labs would have in the way of documentation or any kind of a library of tire tread marks. VAN SUSTEREN: But at least they'd know it was a bicycle. Cina... DELCAMPO: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: ... back to you. Forensic linguistics, Cina, when you -- when you actually study the way something is written, it -- what does that tell you, the linguistics?

WONG: Usage of word and how the person uses those words and in what combination that they use those words is very important. It helps identify the person. I would like to make a point. It's interesting that you bring up tire tread marks and bicycle marks because, as they leave indentations in the dirt or in the ground, as does handwriting in paper. So, for instance, we have the note. Perhaps maybe there was a blank sheet of paper on top that the sniper had written maybe places that he was going to hit and where he was going to do his snipings. And, if they do an indentation test on the note, they might possibly find writing. There could be clues like that. You never know. And that examination, I'm sure, will definitely be done. VAN SUSTEREN: Dr. Wecht, what would be the big break for the police tonight, I mean, besides actually finding the killer? I mean, is there any big clue that you're sort of hoping for that's going to expose itself?

WECHT: I don't know if there's going to be one gigantic clue that is going to break this case open. It's going to be an amalgamation, a correlation of the things that you've talked about here, if you can get some kind of a tire imprint, we know the kind of ammunition, we know this guy is a pretty good shooter, and so on. You go around. You check here and there, the gun clubs and the sporting clubs and the gun shops and so on. "Who uses this kind of ammunition?" "Know anybody who has this kind of vehicle?" "Any kind of" - - and that's the way you put it together, piece by piece, unless something very dramatic happens. And, after 12 shootings, inasmuch as he has not made a real horrible mistake, I doubt that he's going to do so now. I doubt he's going to lick an envelope and leave his own DNA. I doubt he's going to hang on the telephone and have the call traced. This is one -- one smart psychotic individual, and he's not going to make that kind of mistake, and that's why it's going to be a piece-by- piece, block-by-block, tortuous, painstaking, and hope to get some kind of path that narrows the focus down at least categorically. VAN SUSTEREN: Mark, do you feel the same way as Dr. Wecht, that this is almost the impossible?

FUHRMAN: I do. He's very calculated. Nineteen days, 12 shootings. They're no closer to catching him today than they were then because he's not in custody. I mean, maybe they're working on a great clue, maybe a great lead, maybe this message. The thing that's disturbing to me, Greta, and the most disturbing thing is I only see administrators giving press conferences. I don't know who the lead detectives on this task force are. Are there four or five, six, seven, eight, 10 detectives that are the lead detectives that go to every scene, that make the decisions?

And I'd ask one question that I think will tell all in this task force. Who made the decision to go public with knowing they had the message and asking the sniper to communicate? And then, who made the decision to go back and ask for him to communicate once again?

I believe it's not detectives. Detectives aren't making it. And when you take the control out of the very people that do this every day, then you're on the way to selfdestructing your own task force. VAN SUSTEREN: And, of course, it makes it extremely difficult for the detectives to get up and work every day. An awful lot of hard work on everybody involved. Thank you all very much, as always. FUHRMAN: Thank you. WECHT: Thank you. VAN SUSTEREN: Up next, reporting from the Beltway, getting the story out of cagey cops, and dodging the sniper's shots. They bring you the latest and put themselves at risk. Two reporters take you behind the headlines when ON THE RECORD continues. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

Copyright: Content and Programming Copyright 2002 Fox News Network, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2002 FDCH e-Media (Federal Document Clearing House, Inc. -eMediaMillWorks, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, Inc.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

Document Examiner Services

Confidential Inquiries

We would like to hear from you. Contact us online to receive a confidential inquiry regarding our services. Click here.