OFFICERS OFFER CONFLICTING TESTIMONY UNDER OATH IN ANSWER TO DEFENSES ALLEGATIONS

Overview:Testimony
In response to the Neighbors allegation that the Police have changed the inventory receipt for same list while it was in the custody of defense attorney Sarah Swain, adding ammunition to the list and changing the number of guns from 12 to 11, and certain items seized at the scene like laptops and a gun did not make it to the police evidence room.

Lawrence Kansas Police officer Micky Rantz testifies under oath that the Lawrence Police leave a broadly worded inventory (without serial numbers or identification) at the scene of a search warrant, and do not officially log or account for items seized at the scene until it is actually logged into the police department evidence room:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Testimony Taken from the court Transcripts:
Page 32-Micky Rantz-Questioned by Government U.S. Attorney Marietta Parker:
(Rantz): When we
leave the list from the search warrant packet it has very
generic detail, as in 11 guns seized or marijuana plants
seized or stolen property -- certain stolen property
seized. Then when we actually have to log all that stuff
in accountability-wise, there's an actual evidence custody
sheet that has a detailed description, serial numbers for
each item that is then logged into the evidence -- into


page 33-
(Parker)Q. Is leaving a broadly worded inventory at the scene
in accordance with Lawrence Police Department practices
and procedures?
(Rantz)A. Yes

(Parker)Q. Were you also in Exhibit 2C accused a thief -- of
theft of evidence from -- regarding some items taken from
the --
(Rantz)A. Yes
(Rantz)A. Continuing on with the same paragraph -- or the same
section following the ten search warrants it goes, "And
receipts for same inventory switched and forged several
times. Chain of custody violations, theft of evidence
from the evidence room, missing laptops."

(Rantz)A. Because we have gone through every single piece of
evidence that's logged in for this case and had
accountability, either it being in our evidence custody
room or showing it's signed back over to the Neighbors.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
OVERVIEW:
Rantz specifically testifies that the evidence has been gone through and every piece that was logged in had accountability. Either it was in the evidence custody room or it showed it was signed back over to the Neighbors....

Note that there have been no police reports linked to any stolen property associated with this case, and no chain of custody reports turned over to the defense indicating there are any victims of theft having their items returned.

Yet Postal Inspector David Nitz in direct contrast to Rantz's testimony testifies when questioned about missing evidence, that missing evidence was returned to its rightful owners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Page 222--

(Nitz) A. No, all the evidence was accounted for either by
being present -- present in the evidence room or had been
returned and the proper documentation with that.
(Parker)Q. When you say it was returned, returned to the
rightful owners?
(Nitz)A. Correct.
(Parker)Q. All right. And in some instances were a few things
returned to the Neighbors?
(Nitz)A. Yes.

(Parker)Q. And all of the items that were returned were
properly documented and accounted for, correct?
(Nitz)A. Yes.