Interview with Lead Baseline Team Detective, Alex Femenia

The following is a fictional interview with Baseline task force lead investigator, Phoenix Police detective Alejandro Femenia. The interview is fictional, but the facts are real.

Q:  Mr. Femenia, can you tell us a little about yourself and your time at the Phoenix Police homicide division. 

AF: My name is Alejandro Femenia and I was a homicide detective with Phoenix police for more than 20 years.  I’m retired now - members of PPD called my retiring as “taking out the trash.” No, I’m not respected by PPD police or even other detectives. I’m known for my racism and arrogance and that I’ll lie, hide and even plant evidence to secure a conviction.  Some members of PPD who used the same tactics, well, those were my friends, or as I like to call them my “partners in crime.” Heh heh. See we’ve been with PPD for so long that we’ve become immune to what we do to innocent people.  Frankly, we didn’t care who we unjustly hurt as long as it secured our careers with PPD. Like I said, we will do anything like planting evidence to arrest and convict.  Oh and did I mention I’m a racist?  I hate people of color. I also aligned myself with corrupt judges to help ensure I get what I wanted. 

Q:  You were the task team leader of the infamous Baseline Killer investigation; can you tell us some of the tactics you used during this time? What was up with a homicide victim’s Walmart ring?    

AF:  Well, you see after his arrest Goudeau’s home had been searched three times, and there was nothing to be found.  We realized we had rushed to charge an innocent man based on incorrect information and we had made it such a huge media sensationalism, that there was no way we could tell the public we had made a mistake. So we did what we’ve done dozens of times before in our careers, me and Mike Mieslish, planted a replica ring of one of the victims in one of Mark’s shoes. See, her son, even though he had only seen the ring once, claimed it was missing and produced the Tempe Walmart receipt that had the entire description right down to the stones, name of the ring, and inscriptions. So Voilà we had one made! Pretty crafty, eh?  That’s why neither Goudeau’s nor the victim’s DNA is on the ring.

See we know that people are gullible and would believe it when we told them Goudeau was smart enough to wash off the DNA, but dumb enough to leave it in his shoe in the open against a wall on a small shoe shelf for anyone to find while police were searching his house at will. Speaking of which, never mind we had already searched this same room 3 times prior.  In fact, and you’ve got to laugh at this, the very first search warrant’s directive was to seize ALL AND EVERY MEN’S SHOES.  Ha! But again, we knew the general public would be too dumb to think police ever do anything wrong like plant evidence.  So in their mind’s it was completely acceptable for a ring to be found in a shoe that had been examined by police already in several previous searches.

Q:  OK, let’s talk about the false statements you and your buddy Deputy Attorney, William Clayton, made to the grand jury to get the indictment.

AF: Oh, there were little things and there were big things.  We like to play with people’s heads so we told the grand jury the ring “found” (air quotes) was concealed in a zip lock baggy.  Last time I checked, you can’t conceal too much in zip lock baggies since they’re clear. I also told the grand jury that the shoe was in a closet, when really it was out in the open on a small shelf against a bedroom wall.  The same place the shoe had been in our 3 previous searches of their small house.  I just thought it would make Goudeau sound sneaky if I used words like “conceal” and try to hide the fact that the shoe was out in the open. By the way, this was a very small home and you couldn’t really miss anything.

Q: Tell us other lies you and Satan, err I mean Clayton told the grand jury.

AF:  Sure.  You know, we could tell people anything, they don’t know the difference.  For example, the double homicide at the lunch wagon on Lower Buckeye. We told the grand jury that a witness had seen a red truck parked near the crime scene that morning. Ok, so the truck was bigger and newer than the one Goudeau was arrested in; and there’s the fact that it was seen much later in the day, so really not even relevant to the crime; but here’s the really good part! Goudeau didn’t even own a truck at the time of this crime!  Hysterical, right?!  But we didn’t care, we told the grand jury he did.

Another homicide had a small red truck parked near the home of one of the murders. There was a construction crew working near there. But even though Goudeau had never worked that area, we led the jury to believe he had. You know, to tie him in.  Not only that we lied to the grand jury and told them that there were bags of concrete in the bed of the truck. See Goudeau was a cement finisher and we knew once the grand jury heard that - BLAMO! They’d go for it!  Really what was in the bed of the truck were boxes of plaster - but hey, who cares!  I sure as hell didn’t.  Here’s another fun fact, Goudeau worked on large projects, the cement was brought in by cement trucks, he wouldn’t have had bags of anything in the back of his truck!  Am I a master at lying or what?!

Here’s another one . . .boy there are lots of lies we told the grand jury. . . hard to pick just a couple. . . but there was a prostitute that was murdered. Just a few days before her murder, she told a few people she had been beat up by a couple of Hispanic men.  Well Goudeau is Black so we told the grand jury she had been beat up by a couple of Black men.  Get it?! 

Q: Tell me your relationship with Phoenix New Times writer Paul Rubin.

AF:  Oh sure. See Paul was wanting to write a year-long series of articles on homicides in Phoenix called Murder City.  We let him embed himself into homicide for one year so he could write his stories.  He rode with me on many occasions, and hell, I even gave him unauthorized access to classified information. Yup, gave him the log on to our computers and records here. 

Well anyway, since we had done such nice things for Paul, we asked him to write a couple of articles that were pure fiction; one about Goudeau and the case; the other about the pain in the ass police officer, Rusty Stuart. It was great; he even made up awful lies about Ofc Stuart’s divorce. He really tried to ruin this guys reputation.  Never mind Stuart had been with PPD for a number of years with an outstanding record. We didn’t care. We were just trying to cover up our lies and ineptness and thought if we made him look incompetent, then it would help us.

You see Rusty Stuart had evidence that was exonerating in nature to Goudeau, an extensive investigation and report on a man named Terry Wayne Smith. Smith is a violent lunatic who’s own mother thought he was the Baseline Killer, but we had already had our HUGE dog and pony show media blitz when Goudeau was arrested.  We couldn’t shed any light on the fact Goudeau was innocent. We just couldn’t have him keep coming to us over and over again with evidence that exonerated Goudeau. Stuart and I had a yelling match and I finally told him to put it into our report system, but to put it in a format that would make it virtually impossible to be found or retrieved.  Yup, we kept that report hidden for years until underground sources brought it to light. Damn!

Q:  I see I could go one and one with lots more questions, but before we wrap up why don’t you tell us about the regime that oversaw the BK investigation.  Who did you report to directly?

AF:  Oh good one.  Well the person ultimately in charge of the BK investigation was police chief Jack Harris.  He’s gone now.  He was forced to resign because he willfully provided the feds hugely inflated kidnapping statistics.  He was trying to get awarded over a million dollars. Once had had been found out, Harris told the powers that be in a news conference to just come and try to take “these stars off my collar.”  And they did.  (Dumb, sad expression on Fenenia’s face.)

Q:  Stars on his collar?  Well, I have dimples on my butt that are more important than stars on Harris’s collar.  Tell me about your relationship with County Attorney Andrew Thomas and what’s happened with him.

AF:  Oh, yeah, me and Andy.  We were like two corrupt peas in a pod. He actively hid the Smith report I told you about earlier by Ofc Stuart. In fact, five members of PPD and PLEA went to his office directly with the report to try to get someone to investigate Smith, but he hid it too. Ha!  Gotta love this guy!  We could have been brothers!  Anyway, as was his day-to-day routine, abusing his power and authority, he was investigated then disbarred for abuse of power and corruption. The investigation resulted in his treatment of some city officials. Judge Charles E. Jones said that Andy’s violations were “far reaching” and that he had a “four-year campaign of corruption and power abuse” . . . Andy’s misconduct in the BK investigation continues to this day to be ignored. 

Well, when I retired from PPD, I immediately started working directly for Andy ‘cause like I said we are two corrupt peas in a pod. The double dipping was not only great, but I was working for a boss who was just as morally bankrupt as myself.  I miss that effeminate mealy faced dude.

Q:  Mr. Femenia, since you continue in an official role here in Phoenix I can only say God Help Us.  This concludes the interview.  And by the way, Alex,1980 called - it'd like it's clothes and hair cut back.

DNA - Dry to Wet | The Switch

Department of Public Safety DNA Analyst, Lorraine Heath, claims her strongest DNA partial profile was from a woman’s breast, who was face down, submerged in a tub filled with water. (Sorry to be so graphic but the details are important.) Although two witnesses testified they dried those swabs, Heath claims the swabs she had were wet and stored differently than all the other swabs in this case, and all the other Baseline cases. These two DNA swabs were not tested until 5 months later. The issues? If these swabs really were stored wet for 5 months before testing, then degradation is a probability making for unreliable to no results given that mold would have developed, and not to mention DNA dissolves in water. It would be nearly impossible for there to be any DNA considering the state the body was found (wet) much less with the issues of it being stored wet.  

Secondly, if two professional already testified, a doctor and detective, that they dried and then stored the swabs in a way to keep them dry, how is it that two swabs are wet once Heath becomes involved? These being only swabs she is able to get any results?

Inanimate things just don't morph into something different! It would be the same as if the State had put a pistol into evidence, but by the time the ballistics expert gets it, it changed to a rifle.

Every single swab and even useless extracts in this case were consumed/destroyed by the State. Not a single fiber that the defense could use for re-testing. Nothing.

Then there is the case of the woman who is murdered at a car wash with the surveillance video of the attacker pushing her into the back seat of her own car, and him getting into the driver’s seat and driving away. Yet the DNA in the “driving area” EXCLUDES Mark. The DNA is that of an “unknown male” better known as the real attacker. 

So how is it Heath is able to get a partial profile in a nearly impossible scenario of degradation from water and the mysterious switching of swabs, yet in a perfect scenario of the attacker’s DNA in the dry driving area – ignition, steering wheel, etc. – Mark is excluded? 

Not only does the DNA in this entire investigation make absolutely no sense and defies science, but every shred of DNA evidence has been entirely consumed/destroyed by the State/Lorraine Heath.

Two Unrelated Males who’s DNA is IDENTICAL to Mark’s

Yes! It’s true! Read on. 

The Y DNA is the paternal family DNA that is passed on from male to male on the father’s side and is identical to each male.

The State’s so-called DNA “expert”, Lorrain Heath, testified that the Y DNA found at some crime scene evidence is the Goudeau Y DNA. She combined her calculations of the Y with the more discriminating STR DNA to come up with the hyped, inflated, fantastical likelihood ration you’ve seen in the media, giving the general public the illusion that the DNA was entirely unique and that no one else in the world could share the same genetic markers. She said she got a hit on Mark’s Y DNA in the very small Y DNA database in 2006.

Well, now that the Y DNA database, over the years, has increased in size as other men’s Y DNA is added, there are now TWO MORE Y DNA profiles in this database that are IDENTICAL TO THE GOUDEAUS. And these two identical Y profiles are of UNRELATED MALES OF DIFFERENT RACES - one Black, the other White.  Although Heath didn't want to, she was forced to admit on the stand that there are currently two known unrelated males with the same Y DNA as Mark, snapping at Mark's attorney Rod Carter saying "I already told you that when we talked."

There are currently 1,200 Y DNA profiles in this database and as it continues to increase there will likely be more IDENTICAL UNRELATED Y DNA profiles in this database. Can you imagine how many other unrelated males that share the same Y that will never even be in the database?

The more we learn about the DNA in this case, the more we see what crap it is. Did I mention that shortly after Lorrain Heath contacted PPD with misinformation on the DNA resulting in Mark’s arrest, that she left the country?

What prosecutors Susanne Cohen, Patty Stevens, William Clayton and their cohorts Lorrain Heath and Judge Andrew Klein did to Mark is biblical . . . .

...I did them no wrong, but they laid a trap for me.

I did them no wrong, but they dug a pit to catch me.

…Malicious witnesses testify against me.

They accuse me of crimes I know nothing about.

...But they are glad now that I am in trouble; they gleefully join together against me.

...I am attacked by people I don't even know; they slander me constantly. They mock me and call me names; they snarl at me.

...They don't talk of peace; they plot against innocent people who mind their own business.

They shout, "Aha! Aha! With our own eyes we saw him do it!"

..."Look, we got what we wanted! Now we will eat him alive!"

From Psalm 35, David (before he was king), possibly written when he was being hunted by King Saul (1 Samuel 24)