1. The alleged victims in this matter are Paul Topper (CR-79-

2008) ; Annabelle Werner (CR-83-2008); Gladys Garrett (CR- 211-2008); and Kenneth Walter (CR-367-2008).1

2. Defendant has been charged in these four cases with several crimes relating to theft, forgery, and criminal attempt.

3. On January 2, 2008 at approximately 2:00 p.m. Officer Chad Sprankle of the McSherrystown Police Department2 received a complaint concerning an alleged theft against Mr. Topper.

The complaint was made by Mary Forbes.3

4. It is alleged that Defendant came to Mr. Topper’s home and induced him to write her a check for $5000.4

5. While Officer Sprankle was conducting the investigation5 Defendant’s name was mentioned during a conversation with a representative from PNC Bank who Defendant allegedly spoke with concerning how to transfer money from Mr. Topper’s savings account to his checking account. (N.T. 2; January 22, 2008).

1 It should be noted that although the alleged offense against Mr.Walter is reported in No. 367, his challenged identification of the Defendant relates to the action in No. 79 and therefore the Motion to Suppress Mr. Walter’s identification is filed in No.

79. Further, this Court notes that the preliminary hearing transcript filed with No. 79 should be filed in No. 367, and vice versa.

2 Officer Sprankle has been with the McSherrystown Police Department since July, 2006 and was with the Adams County Probation Office for 4 years. He has received his Act 120 training.

3 Ms. Forbes is Mr. Topper’s sister, caretaker, and power of attorney.

4Check Number 1058 from Paul Topper’s account at PNC, with Mary Forbes listed as POA, was written out to “Betsy Hoke” for $5,000 on January 2, 2008. (Com.

Ex. 3A). The check is signed by Paul Topper [N.T. 10, 14; January 22, 2008], and endorsed on the back by “Betsy Hoke.” (Com. Ex. 3B). Ms. Forbes testified that the signature was her brother’s but he could not have written the check out because he cannot read or write. [N.T. 10; January 22, 2008].

5Officer Sprankle never interviewed the Defendant during his investigation.

6. As a result of this conversation Officer Sprankle searched JNET under Defendant’s name and several pictures were produced.

Based on the characteristics of Defendant’s two most recent photographs Sprankle created two photographic arrays (Com. Ex. 1 & 2).6 Each had six images, one of which was Defendant. He set the parameters of the arrays as including white females with dark hair between the ages of 35 and 40.

The JNET search also produced Defendant’s address. This address matched the address on the copy of the driver’s license provided by the PNC Bank representative.7 (Com. Ex. 3A).

7. At approximately 6:00 p.m. on January 2, Officer Sprankle received a complaint from Gladys Garrett. This complaint had the same “MO” as the one from Mr. Topper. A white female was alleged to have entered Garrett’s house complaining of car trouble and asked to use the telephone. It is alleged that the female was only there about 10 minutes and took some money out of the victim’s pocketbook. Ms. Garrett reported the individual to be in her “30s”.

8. Officer Sprankle showed the photographic arrays he had prepared to Ms. Garrett, at her home, later on January 2nd. Ms. Garrett8 was told that the suspect’s photo may or may not be in the lineup and she was to indicate the person only if she was 100% sure it was the perpetrator. She was unable to make a positive identification.

9. Later that day Mr. Topper was shown the same sequence of photographs at his home. He was also told that the suspect’s photograph may or may not be in the lineup and he was to pick one only if he was 100% certain of the identity. He was unable to do so.

10. Officer Sprankle testified that Mr. Topper is a mentally challenged person who lives alone.

6 In Ex. 1, Defendant is photograph number 4; in Ex. 2 she is number 1.

According to the information obtained from JNET the photos were taken 4 days apart. The Commonwealth also submitted a line up of photos (Com. Ex. 4) that contained several photos of Defendant that Officer Sprankle chose when creating his photographic arrays. These were all photographs from past arrests of Defendant.

7 Defendant was required to show a copy of her license when she allegedly attempted to cash the aforementioned check.

8 Ms. Garrett is an elderly female over the age of 70 who lives alone.

11. Neither Mr. Topper nor Ms. Garrett reported ever seeing Defendant prior to that day.

12. Officer Sprankle gave the two photographic arrays to Sgt.

Brad Davis9 of the McSherrystown Police Department.

13. On January 4, 2008 Kenneth Walter reported to Sgt. Davis that he had met “Betsy Hoke” several days earlier. She came to his apartment on January 4th upset about something.10 Walter claims that he went into the bathroom and when he returned Defendant and his wallet were gone.

14. At the McSherrystown police department, Mr. Walter was shown the same two photographic arrays presented to Mr. Topper and Ms. Garrett and told to only make a selection if he was 100% sure of the identity. Sgt. Davis testified that Walter was first shown Com. Ex. 2 and picked out photo number 1 immediately but he indicated that she now looked a little different.

When shown Com. Ex. 1 he immediately picked out photo number 4 but again stated that her appearance had changed; namely that she now had some streaks in her hair.

The photographs selected by Mr. Walter were of the Defendant.

15. At approximately 11:49 a.m. on January 4, 2008 Richard Phillips of the Eastern Adams Regional Police Department11 received a report from Annabelle Werner of a theft from her home which occurred earlier that morning.

16. Ms. Werner testified at the preliminary hearing on January 23, 2008 that at around 11 a.m. on January 4th a female came to her home and asked to use the phone. [N.T. 4; January 23, 2008]. The female was invited into the home and walked through a number of rooms in the house, with the permission of Ms. Werner. Id. When the woman left five to ten minutes after arrival Ms. Werner discovered that her wallet was missing from her purse.

9 Sgt. Davis has been with the McSherrystown Police Department for eight years.

10 Mr. Walter testified at the preliminary hearing that he had met Defendant on January 2, 2008 and she asked him to deposit a check for her. [N.T. 17; January 22, 2008; N.T. 2; January 1, 2008]. The Commonwealth alleges that this is the check from Mr. Topper’s account endorsed to Defendant. (Com. Ex. 3 A & B). Mr.Walter also gave Defendant a car ride on January 3rd. [N.T. 18; January 22, 2008].

11 Officer Phillips has been with Eastern Adams for 12 years.

17. Ms. Werner described the woman to Officer Phillips as being a Caucasian female approximately 5 feet in height, with a heavy build, dark blond shoulder length hair, and wearing jeans and a blue shirt. Ms. Werner is approximately eighty years old.

18. Officer Phillips received the two photographic arrays from Sgt. Davis. At approximately 1:30 p.m. he displayed Ex. 1 only to Ms. Werner; however, she had a difficult time making an identification. She narrowed it down to images No. 2 and

4. This lineup was conducted in Ms. Werner’s living room.

19. Ms. Werner reportedly had never seen the Defendant before this interaction on January 4th. [N.T. 7; January 23, 2008].

20. Later that day, at approximately 2:00 p.m., Michael Trostel, also of the Eastern Adams Regional Police Department, took the second photographic array to Ms. Werner’s home. She immediately identified image number 1 [the Defendant] as the person in her home.

21. On January 5, 2008 Officer Trostel met Defendant at the Eastern Adams Police headquarters after she was arrested whereupon she admitted to the offense upon Ms. Werner.

22. That same evening Defendant admitted to Sgt. Davis the offenses against Mr. Topper, Ms. Garrett, and Mr. Walter.

23. A preliminary hearing was held in CR-367-2008 on January 10, 2008. When asked to identify “Betsy Hoke,” Mr. Walter pointed to Defendant and indicated she was the person in orange. [N.T. 3; January 10, 2008]. Defendant was wearing an orange prison jumpsuit during that hearing.

24. A preliminary hearing was held in CR-79-2008 on January 22, 2008. Mr. Topper was able to identify Defendant as the person who was in his home on January 4th. [N.T. 14, January 22, 2008]. Defendant was again dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit. He hesitated when asked if the perpetrator was in the courtroom, but Officer Sprankle testified that Mr. Topper hesitated prior to answering all of his questions.

25. A preliminary hearing was held in CR-83-2008 on January 23, 2008. At that hearing Ms. Werner identified Defendant as the person who came to her home. She indicated the perpetrator was the person in the courtroom wearing orange.

Defendant was wearing an orange prison jumpsuit at the preliminary hearing.

26. A preliminary hearing was held on February 27, 2008 in CR- 211-2008. Ms. Garrett was able to identify Defendant as the person who entered her home. Defendant was again wearing an orange prison jumpsuit.