RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF STUART ROBINSON:

STATE OF IDAHO vs. CHRISTOPHER C. TAPP

OCTOBER 24, 2016

JUDGES FOR JUSTICE

RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF STUART ROBINSON:
STATE OF IDAHO vs. CHRISTOPHER C. TAPP
OCTOBER 24, 2016

BACKGROUND
In 2014, Judges for Justice, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, submitted several investigative
reports to the Bonneville County Prosecuting Attorneys office, which outlined the overwhelming
evidence of the wrongful conviction of Christopher Tapp for the 1996 murder of Angie Dodge. These
reports were prepared by four internationally recognized experts;

Professor Steven A. Drizin, Clinical Professor of Law at the Northwestern University School of
Law, and Assistant Dean of the Bluhm Legal Clinic, and former Legal Director of the Clinics
renowned Center on Wrongful Convictions. Mr. Drizin is a nationally-recognized expert on
wrongful confessions and custodial interrogations.
FBI Supervisory Special Agent and FBI Profiler (retired) Gregg McCrary, who has over 40 years
of investigative experience, and has testified before the Select Senate Committees on Sexual
Violence. He has consulted on thousands of cases throughout Europe, North and Central America,
and Asia.
FBI Supervisory Special Agent and head of Al Qaeda investigations for the Los Angeles FBI
(retired), Stephen Moore; who has investigated and lectured on investigations throughout Europe
and Asia, notably at the International Law Enforcement Academy in Bangkok. Mr. Moores
investigative reports have been utilized by the U.S. Congress House Foreign Affairs Committee
and the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights.
Dr. Charles Honts, Professor of Psychology, Boise State University, a nationally recognized
authority on the polygraph. Dr. Honts has testified as expert on polygraph examinations over a
hundred times; in federal and state courts in the United States, as well as Australian and Canadian
courts.

Between them, these four award-winning experts have over 120 years of complicated
investigative experience, enjoy international recognition, and have investigated or consulted on literally
thousands of violent crimes throughout the world.
In response to these reports, the Bonneville County Prosecuting Attorney commissioned a Twin
Falls, Idaho, private investigator, Stuart Robinson, formerly of the Idaho State Police, to assess the
validity of the Judges for Justice findings and investigate the Christopher Tapp conviction.

Judges for Justice

1 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Judges for Justice (J4J) herein responds to the un-dated and un-signed report of Stuart Robinson
(Robinson Report), which took more than a year to construct. In the end, Mr. Robinson concurs with
Judges for Justice that the investigative and interrogation practices of the Idaho Falls Police Department
(IFPD) were egregious; characterizing them as unethical, disturbing, and unacceptable. These
practices, Robinson states, led to a false confession by Christopher Tapp. (See Appendix I). In fact,
Robinson went so far as to state;
In my review of this case, statements made by Tapp of his personal involvement in the
death of Angie are either tainted, questionable, or unlikely.
However, Judges for Justice finds that even while the Robinson Report cannot ignore the
obviously corrupt nature of any confession by Christopher Tapp, Robinson fails in any way to
comprehend the truth of the Angie Dodge murder. Instead, his report is based almost completely on
conjecture and invalid premises, including archaic and discredited theories about an interrogators ability
to determine the truthfulness of a suspect by reading their behavior. Robinson also fails to grasp the
obvious nature of the crime and the assailant, and made a calculated decision to ignore, without comment,
most of the Judges for Justice reports. Tellingly, these include the areas of false confessions and criminal
profiling. Finally, Robinson accepts a false premise for his report which dooms the entirety of his work to
a false conclusion.
Due in major part to these systematic failures, the Robinson report was unable to authoritatively
disprove a single contention of the findings of the Judges for Justice reports. Disturbingly, the Robinson
Report also included many patent inaccuracies and statements taken out of context. Ultimately, the
Robinson Report relied on conjecture rather than evidence for its conclusions, rendering it more of an
opinion piece than an investigative report.
In short, the report was derailed by the following systematic procedural errors, improperly
introduced into the report by Robinson:
1. The erroneous, unproven and unsupported presumption of Ben Hobbs guilt. (See Appendix II)
2. The acceptance, and even reliance on, the discredited Reid Technique of investigation, the
improper employment of which was itself the main reason for the false confession of Christopher
Tapp. (See Appendix III)
3. Failure to explain, address or even acknowledge most of the Judges for Justice reports.
4. Misstatements, inaccuracies, errors and statements out of context (See Appendix IV)
5. A basic, fundamental misunderstanding of the crime and the perpetrator. (See Appendix V)
Robinsons Expedient Solution(?)
When a statement, any statement, is determined to be unreliable and tainted, the entire statement
is unreliable and tainted. However, while dismissing Tapps statements as unreliable, tainted, and
unlikely, Robinson inexplicably uses those very same statements to attempt to prove Tapps presence at
the murder scene. This self-contradictory and illogical conclusion leads a reasonable person to question
whether Robinson had an agenda to create a final report which would in spite of all existing evidence
to the contrary show that Tapp was not completely innocent, yet still acknowledge the crescendo of
expert voices pointing to a miscarriage of justice in this case.

Judges for Justice

2 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

Perhaps Robinson was simply mistaken, and was misled by the systematic errors in his report.
Perhaps, the illogical and fallacious conclusions of the Robinson Report were intended to provide a
solution for a difficult problem. Much like a magicians trick, they rely on deceptive appearances and
distracting bursts of smoke to distract the reader from the truth and accept an impossibility. Magicians
call this, smoke and mirrors.
Regardless of the genesis of the reports failures, its conclusions allow the prosecuting attorney to
claim that the police may have erred, but in essence, got the substance of the case right. Importantly, it
would allow the City of Idaho Falls to avoid any liability for Tapps damages as a result of this
miscarriage of justice. If Prosecutor Clark was to act to keep Tapp in prison or offer a plea deal on the
strength of Robinsons unsophisticated, erroneous and contradictory report especially in light of the
overwhelming evidence of Tapps innocence, it would reflect a sad cynicism about our justice system. It
would also ensure that the actual murderer of Angie Dodge would never face justice, and remain a threat
to kill again if he has not already.

Judges for Justice

3 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
It is noted that Robinson disagreed with several contentions of a single Judges for Justices
reports conclusionsalmost all of it regarding crime scene forensics, which has little or no bearing on
the improper interrogation of Christopher Tapp which resulted in a false confession which is the only
evidence which can be claimed by those who believe him guilty.
The forensic issues do, however, bear on an analysis of the crime, as do Robinsons
misinterpretation of some, and failure to recognize the significance of others. Because the crime has never
been solved, it is important to look realistically at all forensic evidence. Robinson instead waves
important evidence away with conjecture suited to the muddled view of the murder propagated by IFPD
twenty years ago. A significant number of Robinsons contentions simply cannot be defended by logic or
science; these include:

Dismissal of the significance of 300 milliliters of urine in Angies bladder at the time of
death. (See Appendix IV & V)
Robinsons false statement that the taking of the victims body temperature at a crime
scene is not useful in the investigation of a murder. (See Appendix IV)
Robinsons dismissal of the fact that when found, Angies head was on her pillow and her
bedsheet was under her body; more evidence that the attack began while Angie slept.
(See Appendix V)
The illogical contention that, while every other bit of the information about the crime and
crime scene were fed to Tapp in disturbing ways by unethical detectives, one
single kernel of accurate information was not; the description of clothing worn by Angie
when murdered. (Though Robinson contends that at the time of the murder Tapp was too
drunk and drug-addled to even know which room he was in). (See Appendix IV)
Robinsons erroneous and intentionally misleading statement that though excluded by
the lab as donors of DNA on tested crime scene evidence, Tapp and Hobbs could still be
the source of DNA on crime scene evidence. (See Appendix IV)
Robinsons personal conjecture regarding crime-scene evidence, none of which is
supported by physical evidence. (See Appendix IV)

Judges for Justice

4 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

CONCLUSIONS
In their reports and videos, Judges for Justice has presented irrefutable proof that Tapp and Hobbs
are innocent of the murder of Angie Dodge and that Christopher Tapp was coerced into a false confession
during his polygraph examinations. Judges for Justice has offered the testimony of Dr. Charles Honts, an
internationally recognized expert on the polygraph. Dr. Honts found the polygraphs to be a ruse, a sham,
an attempt to get Tapp to support the police theory of the moment. He called the polygraphs
"psychologically coercive in the extreme." Robinson simply ignores Dr. Honts findings.
Judges for Justice presented conclusive proof in the form of actual polygraph examination
videos, which show extreme psychological coercion and unscrupulous mental manipulation employed by
the police on an unsuspecting Tapp. (These videos may be viewed at www.judgesforjustice.org; "Detailed
Explanation of the Chris Tapp False Confession" narrated by Judge Michael Heavey (Ret.))
Robinsons compromise, split the baby, report lacks integrity and scientific authority, and his
investigation is invalid because it ignores significant evidence which contradicts its conclusions. Our
legal system requires evidence, specifically to protect us from the whim and caprice of the powerful.
Robinson does the Bonneville County Prosecutor a huge disservice when, without a shred of credible
evidence, he contends that Tapp was in the murder room and Ben Hobbs was Angies killer.
Robinson also ignores the Judges for Justice pro bono report of Gregg McCrary, a retired FBI
Supervisory Special Agent and nationally recognized expert on false confessions. Mr. McCrary found
Tapp's entire confession to be false.
Robinson dismisses without comment the pro bono report of Professor Steve Drizin,
Northwestern University Law School, Center on Wrongful Convictions, also a nationally recognized
expert on false confessions. Drizin found Tapp's confession to be false, as he did for a 2006 statement of
Tapp's.
Stuart Robinson agrees that the confession of Christopher Tapp is false. Therefore, all of the
evidence points to a single perpetrator who killed Angie Dodge in her sleep sometime later than 3:00 a.m.
on June 13, 1996. Six scientific tests of crime scene evidence prove that a single killer left his DNA. The
DNA left at the crime scene does not match Chris Tapp or Ben Hobbs.
How could Robinson agree that Tapps confession is false, then use that confession as evidence?
Robinsons mistaken belief that Tapp was present at the murder scene was based on a false
premise, conjecture and inaccurate information, and his report was ultimately unable to authoritatively
refute a single conclusion regarding the innocence of Christopher Tapp. When investigator Robinson did
disagree with some of Judges for Justices reports conclusions, he did so without the benefit of
supporting science, forensics, evidence or facts. His report lacks scientific rigor and simply ignores
significant evidence raised by Judges for Justice.
As a negotiating platform, Robinsons document might seem to offer a compromise. He concedes
errors by the police and yields some ground. From the standpoint of public interest, however, Robinsons
contention that Tapp was at the crime scene lacks any substance or credibility. His conclusion that Hobbs
was the murderer has even less substance. Too many people understand the fundamental problem with
this case: Tapp doesnt know who left the DNA at the crime scene, and he would know had he been there.
IFPD and Robinsons scenario assumes that Christopher Tapp would knowingly risk the death penalty to
protect a person whose name he could not remember.
Judges for Justice
5 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

The time has come to face that problem, rather than try to evade it with a compromise that makes
a mockery of the facts and sound investigative methods. Judges for Justice offers three recommendations:
1. Chris Tapp is demonstrably innocent. Ben Hobbs is demonstrably innocent. Prosecutor Clark
should release Tapp immediately. Anything short of that is a travesty of justice. It is
incumbent upon the Bonneville County Prosecuting Attorney to immediately act pursuant to
IRPC Rule 3.8 (h);
When a prosecutor knows of clear and convincing evidence establishing that the
defendant in the prosecutors jurisdiction was convicted of an offense that the
defendant did not commit, the prosecutor shall seek to remedy the conviction.
2. Judges for Justice has delivered an expert report1 with a clear-headed, unbiased assessment of
the crime, the problems with the investigation, and the way forward. This murder was
committed by a lone individual who accessed Angie's apartment while she was sleeping,
stabbed her to death, and left his DNA at the crime scene. Nothing suggests and all
evidence mitigates against a group of local people known to Angie, who somehow teamed
up with a mystery man. This common sense understanding is the basis for a fresh start.
3. It is past time to face the truth, and stop wasting effort and taxpayer dollars defending a
wrongful conviction.
Whether the Robinson Report will be used (once again) to wrongly implicate Christopher Tapp in
the murder of Angie Dodge, or whether Prosecutor Clark will see the Robinson Report for what it is;
scientifically, forensically and intellectually indefensible, has yet to be seen. However, anything short of
an immediate release of Tapp is unacceptable.
Every police and investigative agency in the world is subject to error. None are immune.
A single mistake is not the measure of any agency. The true character and integrity of a law
enforcement organization depends not on perfection, but their response to inevitable error. IFPD
has been provided with indisputable evidence of Christopher Tapps innocence and given the
opportunity to rectify the situation. Sadly, to this point, rather than quickly remedy the problem,
they have circled the wagons and depended on tortured logic to save face. The Idaho Falls
Police Department must live up to its mission statement; A Community Safe from Crime and
Disorder. Stonewalling the public while allowing a vicious murderer to remain on the streets is
an anathema to their own ideals.
Angies killer, according to every profiler who has reviewed this case, was a stranger who lived in
her neighborhood and was visually stalking her. The motive was sexual not the result of settling a grudge.

1 See expert report of Steve Moore. Also, no objective person could view the
evidence in J4J's video entitled, "Detailed Explanation of the Chris Tapp False
Confession," and conclude anything other than Tapp is innocent, his confession is
false. The video contains actual video of psychologically extreme coercion in the
polygraph examinations. See website, www.judgesforjustice.org. See reports of
Gregg McCrary, Steve Drizin and Dr. Charles Honts.
Judges for Justice
6 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

There is but one way to solve this murder, and bring the actual killer of Angie Dodge to justice:
Find the DNA match. Continuing to waste time and resources defending a bad conviction distracts from
that goal, and is an affront to the public interest. If authorities act with courage and honesty, however, it is
still possible to investigate the murder properly, and with an understanding of modern investigative
methods, identify the one man who murdered Angie Dodge. Regardless, IFPD and the Bonneville County
Prosecutor would be well-advised to remember that if they do not act, efforts to exonerate Christopher
Tapp and find the actual killer of Angie Dodge will continue to increase, not decrease.

Judge Mike Heavey

Co-Founder
Judges for Justice

Steve Moore
Chief Investigator
Judges for Justice

Mike Heavey

Judges for Justice

7 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

APPENDIX I:
CONCURRENCE
Even with the failure of Robinsons report to recognize Tapps complete innocence, there was
consensus between Robinson and Judges for Justice on many important points, almost all relating to the
conclusion that the interrogation of Christopher Tapp was such an egregious abuse of police power that
Robinson stated, In my review of this case, statements made by Tapp of his personal involvement in the
death of Angie are either tainted, questionable, or unlikely.
The following are just some of the statements by Robinson in his report which support and
validate the police misconduct which led to a coerced and police-concocted statement of guilt by Tapp:

.it appears Detective Finn conducted his polygraphs in an unprofessional and reckless
manner. Pg. 16
An interviewer should never disclose to a suspect any facts of the crime; especially what type of
weapon was used. Investigators should withhold specific information relating to the crime and/or
the crime scene. This is to ensure that when a suspect is located and interviewed there is no
question as to the truth of the confession given by the suspect. Pg. 18
Not only has Fuhriman contaminated Tapps interview, he kept instilling that a knife was used in
the murder. Pg. 19
The polypgraphist [sic] should not be involved in the interrogation of a suspect. Pg. 20
While he is asking Tapp these questions, Tapp is still connected to the polygraph machine. This
is an unethical interview practice. Pg. 20
it appearsthat Detective Finns refusal to allow Tapp to leave has made this an involuntary
statement. Pg. 21
Detective Fuhriman is revealing more details of the crime and evidence that was collected at
Angies apartment. This added to the contamination of any statements Tapp might make about
evidence left at the scene. Pg. 22
Detective Fuhriman had been told to wait for Tapps attorney prior to beginning any
questioning. Detective Fuhriman still proceeded questioning Tapp without the presence of his
attorney. Pg. 22
Detective Finn should not have advised Tapp how the body of Angie was discovered. Pg. 23
Prior to the polygraph test Detective Finn informed Tapp that Jeremy stayed in the apartment
with Hobbs. Pg. 28
Detective Fuhriman continued to feed Tapp information about the crime scene Pg. 29
The interview is already in progress when the video starts. Pg. 30
Somewhere between the last interview and this interview, detectives take Tapp to the apartment
where Angie was killed. No documentation was made of this trip by video, pictures, and/or
recording. In my opinion and experience this practice was very disturbing and is an unacceptable
police practice. Pg. 30
Fuhriman should have stopped talking to Tapp and allowed him to speak with his attorney.
Fuhriman has no right to know what Tapp wants to speak with his attorney about. Pg. 31
Detective Finn keeps adding undue stress to Tapp just prior to his polygraph exam by informing
Tapp of possibly receiving a death sentence in this case. Pg. 32
From this point in the investigation any information that Tapp provides concerning a knife being
used in the crime...is tainted. Pg. 39

Judges for Justice

8 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

Detective Fuhriman further contaminates the interrogation when he asked Tapp if he noticed
any stuffed animals in the room where Angie was killed. Pg. 41
Detective Fuhriman continued to contaminate the interview by telling Tapp that some sexual
acts were performed on Angie during her murder. Pg. 42
Detective Fuhriman told Tapp that someone was forcing her (Angie) to perform oral sex on
them during the crime. This info was very specific to this crimeThis is information that should
never have been told to a suspect especially one believed to have been present during the
murder. Pg. 42
In my opinion, any statements Tapp made regarding his involvement assisting or holding Angie,
during her murder, after the visit to her apartment on the 29th is questionable and tainted. Pg. 42
Tapps own statement that he cut Angie across the breast is questionable. Pg. 43
I believe that the repeated consequences stated to Tapp and the fact that he could end up with
the death penalty had started to affect his creditability [sic] as to the truthfulness of his
statements. Pg. 43
It is my opinion that after the visit to the apartment, and the detectives continually providing
specific crime scene information, anything Tapp said, any statement that he made concerning
the murder of Angie has been contaminated. Pg. 44
Detective Stacy further contaminated Tapps statements by also providing him with additional
specific crime details. Pg. 44
In my review of this case, statements made by Tapp of his personal involvement in the death
of Angie are either tainted, questionable, or unlikely. Pg. 49

Despite Robinson's awareness of the many ways in which Tapp was manipulated, he improbably
concludes that Tapp was present when the murder took place. A more straightforward conclusion, given
the many problems enumerated above, is that Tapp's statements are wholly unreliable. There is no kernel
of truth to be salvaged. Tapp knows nothing about the crime. Nothing he says is of any value in solving it.
Robinsons conclusion is unfathomable.

Judges for Justice

9 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

APPENDIX II
ERRANT PRESUMPTION OF BEN HOBBS GUILT
When a report begins with a false premise, it cannot end with a valid conclusion. One of the
major flaws of Robinsons report is that it assumes that Ben Hobbs killed Angie Dodge and predicates its
arguments on that incorrect assumption. There exists no circumstantial, physical, scientific or credible
testimonial evidence that Ben Hobbs was in any way involved in Dodges murder. In fact, all reliable
physical and testimonial evidence disproves his involvement. To use Hobbs guilt as a pre-existing fact
invalidates any conclusions based on the presumption.
Hobbs Motive:
According to IFPD; the main motive for Ben Hobbs to kill Angie Dodge, according to IFPD, was
that Ben blamed Angie for the breakup of his marriage. However, the best and only credible evidence
obtained regarding the relationship between Hobbs and Dodge indicates that there was no bad blood
between them, and in fact they were close friends. An example of this information was obtained in an
interview with none other than Hobbs ex-wife DeAnn Calloway. In the interview, conducted by Sgt.
Fuhriman Calloway states unequivocally, Angie did not cause the breakup between herself and Hobbs.
In his report, Robinson infers that had Fuhriman correctly interviewed Calloway, he would have learned
that Hobbs was angry at Dodge. This is simply reckless speculation.
Robinson is unaware, or simply ignores, that in Tapp's first interrogation on 1/7/97 Sgt. Fuhriman
planted the motive with Tapp that Ben was angry because Angie caused the break-up of his marriage with
DeAnn. Tapp responded that he didn't know about Angie causing the break-up and three times stated that
he thought Ben and Angie were friends.
It remains a fact that only one person ever testified in court or told police that Benjamin Hobbs
had an anger or a rage towards Angie Dodge which would in any way shape or form reach the level of
violence. And that person was Christopher Tapp, during interrogations where he regurgitates what was fed
to him.
Ultimately, Robinson himself admits; The investigators never really did determine the reason
Hobbs was upset with Angie. Nor did they ever establish any proof that Hobbs actually was at odds with
Dodge. It remains baseless speculation by IFPD. Robinsons report was unable to authoritatively or
convincingly establish a single motive for Ben Hobbs to harm Angie Dodge.
There is no doubt this was a sexual homicide. The crime is motivated by lust, not anger, end of
story.

Judges for Justice

10 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

APPENDIX III
INAPPROPRIATE RELIANCE ON THE CONTROVERSIAL REID TECHNIQUE
Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of Robinsons report is his repeated reliance on discredited
theories regarding reading of interrogation suspects body language to measure truth or deception.
In the Judges for Justice report, The Murder of Angie Raye Dodge, An Investigative Case
Review, 10/7/2014 (Moore), five pages were devoted to the IFPD interrogators use and misuse of the
Reid Technique of interrogation. The Reid Technique is so controversial that it has been legally banned
in several European countries, and discarded by many of the rest. The Reid method depends heavily upon
a detective reading an individuals body language to determine whether the person is being truthful or
deceptive.
In fact, people who believe they can tell whether someone is being truthful or deceptive are, in
effect, deceiving themselves. The only valid way in which to prove the truth of an individuals statement
is by corroboration.
Law enforcement agencies around the world are stepping back from Reid. Hundreds upon
hundreds of men convicted of rape have been exonerated by DNA in the past several years after
confessing to the crimes. The Reid Technique, when improperly used, (as it was in Idaho Falls) has been
shown to elicit confessions from innocent people. For reasons known only to Robinson, his report did not
even acknowledge the criticisms of Reid pointed out in the Judges for Justice reports which he had been
tasked to assess. In fact, rather than acknowledge or debate the controversial technique, he cited The Reid
Technique ten times as the reason for his own conclusions. Additionally, he used Reid doctrine at least six
separate times to support his theories.
The following statements by Robinson evince his disappointing reliance on these discredited
theories of law enforcement.

Truthful subjects will respond directly, and forceful denial of guilt when confronted [sic]. Pg.
17
o (It should come as no surprise to readers of this report that many deceptive, guilty people
will frequently also respond to an accusation with a forceful denial of guilt.)
Tapp finishes his answer with I swear to God I didnt. A suspect who swear to God [sic] or
offers to swear on a stack of Bibles, is, in many instances not telling the truth. Pg. 21,
footnote 13.
o (Many deceptive people also resort to oaths to prove that they are telling the truth. By
definition, Robinsons own statement, resorting to oaths, in many instances would be
evidence of deception.)
When interviewing a suspect and he/she cannot corroborate their information such as Tapp
saying he cant remember who gave him the ride home and who the person was he was going to
meet is usually a sign of deception. Pg. 24, footnote 21.
o (Failure to remember facts of an eveningespecially when one had been under the
influence of alcohol or drugs is certainly not, in and of itself, evidence of deception or
guilt.)
A lying suspect sometime will speak in fragmented or incomplete sentences. He may also feign a
memory failure when confronted with a probing question or in responding to a direct accusation
of lying.

Judges for Justice

11 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

(It is accepted science that people under extreme stress will frequently speak in
fragmented or incomplete sentences, or even stutter or forget information. It is safe to
assume that a person threatened with the death penalty during a police interrogation
experiences extreme stress.)
Fuhriman in first interview told Tapp several times that he is involved in some manner in the
death of Angie. Tapp never denies this.2 Pg. 34
o (Failure to deny is not admission of guilt. Regardless, Fuhriman never asked Tapp
whether he was involved, he simply made a statement that he was. Tapp was not invited
to respond.)
An innocent person who knows that they are not involved in a crime, such as murder, are going
to deny any involvement adamantly and not answer with just Okay. Pg. 34
o (Obviously, guilty persons will also frequently and adamantly deny involvement in crime.
Force of denial is not evidence of guilt or innocence.)
o

Reliance on these investigative myths is a major factor in the wrongful conclusions by IFPD, and
ultimately the wrongful conviction of Christopher Tapp. That the validating investigator also subscribes
to these errant techniques raises questions about whether he is too close to the investigation to maintain
an impartial stance.

2 In fact, Tapp does indeed deny his involvement multiple times. This statement,
besides an indication of the reliance on the Reid Technique, is also intentionally
misleading.
Judges for Justice
12 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

APPENDIX IV
INACCURACIES, ERRORS, AND MISSTATEMENTS
Bladder Contents: Error
Possibly the most significant error by Robinson is his unwarranted dismissal of the significant
volume of urine present in Angie Dodges bladder at the moment of her death. Judges for Justice pointed
out an autopsy finding by the medical examiner, Dr. Ellwein; that Angie Dodge, at the time of her death,
had a full bladder holding approximately 300 ml. of urine.
Research conducted by noted scientist James G. Wigmore has established the rate of bladder fill
in normal human systems. Utilizing Wigmores research, a conservative conclusion can be made that
Angie Dodge had not urinated for nearly 2 hours, and if awake, was experiencing significant
discomfort. Yet she was mere feet from her own bathroom and did not take the opportunity to urinate? It
is a scientific fact that the urge to urinate is suppressed during sleep. The obvious conclusion is that Angie
Dodge had been asleep for at least 2 hours when attacked, making the earliest possible attack time (and
therefore time of death) nearly 3 a.m. This provides Tapp with an indisputable alibi.
Robinson dismisses this out of hand in a single sentence, on information apparently derived from
a phone call or E-mail:
When I contacted Forensic Pathologist Dr. Glen Groben, Ada County Forensic Coroner,
with the above theory, he stated that it was an unproven scientific method and he would
not trust it.
Robinson does not discuss what it is, but he may have asked the wrong question. The point is
not that a full bladder can establish time of death, but it strongly indicates Angie had been asleep 3 for
hours before she was murdered. This is consistent with the research done by Wigmore, forensic
toxicologist who has testified in over 600 criminal cases.
The Handbook of Neuro-Urology, (1994) by David N. Rushton, Royal London Hospital, and
its chapter on Urodynamic Assessment, (C.J. Kelleher and Linda Cardozo), states unequivocally:
Physiologically, the normal rate of bladder filling is approximately 100 ml/hr.
Common sense suggests nobody goes to bed with a full bladder. When looked at objectively, without the
need to protect a theory, this evidence strongly indicates that Angie was murdered long after she went to
bed that night.
Body Temperature: Misstatement of fact
Robinson attempted in his report to excuse IFPD and the county medical examiner for their
failure to establish the body temperature of the victim at the crime scene. Contradicting established
3 Further evidence that Angie was asleep is that she is found next to her air
mattress, braless, bare feet. Her pillow is underneath her head, her top bedsheet is
underneath her body, her comforter is found down and away from her feet towards
her bedroom door. There is blood spatter on the wall above her head location had
she been sleeping.
Judges for Justice
13 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

practice, Robinson argued that taking the temperature of a body at a crime scene, or cutting into the body
to take the temperature of the liver, during autopsy, is no longer an acceptable practice by
pathologists."
In defense of this demonstrably erroneous statement, Robinson makes the mistake of citing
Vernon J. Geberth, M.S., M.P.S., B.B.A., FBINA, and his seminal work, Practical Homicide
Investigation; specifically the chapter regarding estimation of the time of death. Apparently, Robinson
stopped reading the chapter before Geberth conclusively contradicts Robinsons statement:
During life, the body maintains an approximate temperature of 98.6F. After death, the
body gives off heat until it becomes the same temperature as the surrounding medium.
The rate of cooling can be an important measurement in the estimation of the time of
deathbody temperature can be taken by rectum with the thermometer at the crime
scene to obtain an accurate reading."
Robinsons contention that cutting into the liver to determine body temperature is; no longer an
acceptable practice by pathologists is also in stark contrast to the very text from which he quoted:
Core body temperature is generally considered to be the most reliable indicator of time
of death up to approximately 18 hours. Core body temperature is taken by inserting a
thermometer into the liver which is then compared with the ambient temperature in the
crime scene."
Ascertaining body temperature at the scene is crucial because it provides immediate information
to detectives at the crime scene whether the crime had been committed within the previous 18 hours. This
can be invaluable in the early phases of an investigation when suspects might be attempting to flee the
areaor even kill again. At the time that Angies body was discovered, she had been dead at most, nine
hours, which would have made body temperature a productive element of the investigation. Taking of the
body temperature at the crime scene also ensures against the failure of authorities to conduct an autopsy
within the crucial 18 hours of the time of death. In this case, that would have been of crucial significance,
because the autopsy was conducted nearly 24 hours after the body was discovered, (31 hours after the
probable time of death) eliminating any chance of establishing exact time of death to assist in the
investigation.
Mr. Robinsons decision to take information out of context in order to misrepresent the actual
professional opinion of the author of a textbook, raises serious concerns. It suggests he lacks neutrality
and is bent on defending the results of a flawed investigation.
Clothing Worn by Victim When Found: Fallacious Arguments
Robinsons report rightly eviscerates IFPD police interrogation procedures, repeatedly pointing
out how information was illicitly fed to Tapp. However, Robinson then chooses one statement made by
Tapp out of all the hours of interrogation, and deems it the one true statement and it is the statement
he uses to place Tapp at the murder scene.
Robinson relies on the following statement to conclude Tapp knew what she was wearing, from
page 6 of Tapp interrogation transcript of 1/17/97:
BROWN: When she answered the door, think about what she had on.

Judges for Justice

14 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

TAPP: I mean, the only thing that comes halfway close to my mind is a t-shirt and sweats.
This is hardly a definitive statement of what Angie was wearing. An objective person could easily
conclude Tapp was guessing. In answering three separate questions that immediately followed,
a. Tapp states the color of the sweats is "gray." They were purple.
b. Tapp states the color of the T-shirt was red, "My mind says red, but." The T-shirt was purple.
c. Tapp was unable to recall that the T-shirt had a prominent "ENUF" logo.
This conclusion is even more puzzling, as Robinson had already postulated in his report that Tapp
was so chemically altered the night of the murder, that [assuming he was at the crime scene] he couldn't
even remember which room he was in. How then, would Tapp remember the clothing worn by the victim,
unless prompted?
The interrogation tapes show clearly how many days it took for Tapp to finally guess what Angie
was wearing. He said she was wearing the clothing she was often known to wear, and he may have gotten
this information from other sources. On page 12 of the 1/29/97 polygraph transcript, Detective Finn asks
Tapp about Angies clothes:
FINN: What was she wearing?
TAPP: Sweats and a shirt.
FINN: What color sweats?
TAPP: From the picture, it looked like they were black or dark blue or something.
Obviously, Tapp was not speaking from memory of being at the crime scene, but his memory
from being shown the crime scene photos on 1/17/97.
Robinson also found disturbing the fact that Sgt. Fuhriman and Officer Steve Finn took Tapp to
the apartment where the murder had occurred and showed him the complete layout of the crime scene, all
without recording the visit in any way, shape or form. There is no way to know what crime scene and
murder details were divulged to Tapp off camera. Robinson himself, in his report, states;
By taking Tapp to the crime scene and not documenting any of it, makes any
information received from Tapp here after is questionable as to its reliability. There is
no way to know if it is independent corroboration or if this is information that
Detective Fuhriman or Finn provided, or suggested to Tapp while they were in the
apartment.
Judges for Justice shares Robinsons concern about the disclosures made to Tapp that day.
Misleading statement regarding alibi:
The following are statements from the Robinson report which are patently incorrect and
misleading:

Judges for Justice

15 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

Tapp tells Detective Fuhriman that he was at home at the Avalon Apartments when Angie was
murdered.
This is a mischaracterization of Tapps statement. Tapp actually said he was at the apartment the
night Angie was murdered. Not at the time Angie was murdered. Nobody knows the exact time when
Angie was murdered, due to IFPDs failure to process the crime scene correctly.
DNA misstatement:
Robinson states: Only Christian Grebstad could not be excluded [as the contributor of the DNA
recovered from] the sweatpants. Hobbs and Tapp were excluded.The Enuf t-shirt had three (3) or
more contributors. Hobbs and Tapp were excludedThe teddy bear also had two (2) contributors. Hobbs
and Tapp were excluded.
This is a non sequitur and a set of contradictory facts. He first states that only Grebstad could not
be excluded. (Untrue because the killer could not be excluded.) But then Robinson states the scientific
report actually excluded Tapp and Hobbs on the sweatpants, T-shirt, and teddy bear.
Robinson then discusses the fact that several items collected did not have enough DNA on them
to determine who the donor might be, and he states; The above DNA testing does not preclude the fact
that Hobbs or Tapp were the contributors it only means that a positive result could not be concluded with
the DNA discovered.
Again, this is a fallacious argument because we know that Tapp and Hobbs were excluded as
contributors per the Bode lab report of January 2013.
In other words, Robinson hints that perhaps Tapps or Hobbs DNA was at the crime scene, but it was
below the threshold of detection. This is wishful, misleading thinking, not evidence. The plain fact is that
neither Tapps nor Hobbs DNA was found in any of the samples tested, they were in fact excluded by
science. No physical evidence of any kind puts them at the scene. By attempting to spin this information
into something else by pure innuendo is evidence of a lack of professional objectivity.
Crime scene misstatements
Robinson states: Angie had to have allowed entry into her apartment. There was no forced entry
discovered, therefore she knew her attackers.
Again, this conclusion is incorrect and misleading. The statement assumes (without supporting
evidence) that Angie locked all of her accessible doors and windows on the second floor. There is no
evidence to indicate that fact, much less proof of it. Again, Robinson appears to be trying to determine
how Tapp could have committed the crime, not assessing whether he did so or not.
Statements Unsupported by Evidence:
Robinson notes Tapps (dubious) statement during interrogation in which he stated that Angie had
absorbed an enormous bare-knuckled blow to the face, so powerful that Tapp wondered how Angie
could remain on her feet. Robinson failed to explain the utter lack of evidence of such a blow, quoting
only the report of pathologist Dr. Gary Ellwein, in which a lesion was found on the side of the forehead
between the hairline and left eyebrow. Significantly, Dr. Ellwein later ruled that this wound was not
significant. There were no split lips, bruising, chipped or broken teeth, bleeding from the nose, damage to
nose cartilage, lacerations.nothing.
Judges for Justice
16 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

Judges for Justice pointed out that there was no evidence that the killer attempted to clean the
body or the crime scene. Indeed, he left significant evidence of his identity, including semen. However,
Robinson makes the startling claim on Page 8 that wipe marks and smears across [the victims] lower
abdomen, upper right hip and left thigh.is evidence that someone attempted to wipe away (clean)
evidence. This type of swipe is not an indication of cleaning a crime scene. Robinsons logic is
tortured and suspect.

Judges for Justice

17 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page

APPENDIX V
EVIDENCE OF A LONE KILLER
Multiple police profiles provided to the IFPD investigators of Angie Dodge point out that the
most likely scenario for the murder was a lone offender who snuck into her apartment, killed her in a blitz
attack while sleeping, then escaped the scene without attempting to sanitize the crime scene in any way.
Nothing has changed to refute those profiles, and all evidence points to this type of lone killer. Yet
Robinson inexplicably accepts as a premise the flawed IFPD theory of multiple assailants, led by Ben
Hobbs.
There is overwhelming evidence that Angie's murder and sexual assault was by a lone perpetrator.
He attacked Angie while she lay sleeping.
a. Six (6) separate DNA tests on crime scene evidence show only the profile of one man. The same
man who left the semen. These DNA tests specifically exclude Chris Tapp and Ben Hobbs as
contributors to any crime scene evidence.
b. The FBI has investigated or studied tens of thousands of sexual homicides. Three FBI trained
experts (Stimson-1996, Hendricks-1996 and McCrary-2016) have stated that this crime is a single
perpetrator crime, only a lone killer was involved. These experts predicted that he is a stranger to
Angie, a peeping Tom, had Angie under observation, and lived in the neighborhood. The killer's
motive was lust.
c. Angie was not attacked by three of her friends. She was murdered while she was sleeping. Angie
was found lying next to her air mattress bed. Her pillow was under her head, her top bed sheet
was found under her body, and a white floral comforter was at her feet as if it had been thrown
there. There was blood spatter on the bedroom wall just above her head location had she been
sleeping.
d. Angie's bladder contained 300 milliliters 10 fluid ounces of urine at autopsy. Ten fluid ounces
is almost a full can of soda. As will be discussed more infra, this is powerful evidence that she
was sleeping. As human beings, we all know that people are not going to hold that much urine
volume unless they are sleeping.

Judges for Justice

18 | 19

October 24, 2016

Page