Copyright held by The John Cooke Fraud Report. Reprint rights are granted with attribution to The John Cooke Fraud Report with a link to this website.
REVISTING THE KAITLYN ARQUETTE CASE
It’s been nearly two decades since Southern California fraud defense attorney Michael Bush introduced me to one of the most amazing women I have ever met, Lois Arquette, who writes under the pen name Lois Duncan. It had been five years since the shooting death of her youngest child. Our May/June 1995 issue of The John Cooke Fraud Report asked the question, “Who Killed Kaitlyn Arquette?” and the response from claims people reading the article pushed the investigation forward. Over the intervening years the family has continued to ask questions despite overwhelming opposition, road blocks and even death threats. Of all the stories we have ever run, Kait’s may be the most remembered. Readers continually ask, “What ever happened in that case?” Fast forward to 2013 and the following interview with Lois Duncan, author of over 50 fiction books such as “I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER,” and “HOTEL FOR DOGS,” as well as a non-fiction adult book, “WHO KILLED MY DAUGHTER?” Duncan’s new book, “ONE TO THE WOLVES: ON THE TRAIL OF A KILLER,” published by Planet Ann Rule and available for download to Kindle, Nook, and other popular e-book readers, is also adult non-fiction and covers the most recent events in this family’s true-life horror story.
Kim: My first question is, given the amazing amount of time, energy and raw courage you’ve put into the continued investigation of the circumstances of Kait’s death, what is the current status of the official Albuquerque Police Department investigation?
Duncan: It is still labeled a “random drive-by shooting” even though there is a massive amount of cumulative investigative information to suggest Kait’s death was anything but random. In”WHO KILLED MY DAUGHTER??” I wrote of what we knew then. That was 1992. As time has passed, technology has advanced and my recently released book, “ONE TO THE WOLVES: ON THE TRAIL OF A KILLER,” reflects our 24-year battle and states, no holds barred, what we have learned between then and now.
Kim: I first met you in 1994 when you were the dinner speaker at a seminar of the Texas International Association of Special Investigation Units in Austin, Texas. At that time, all you knew about was an insurance scam involving a Vietnamese group in Albuquerque who would fly to the LA area to stage auto accidents.
Duncan: That’s true. That’s all we knew then. Soon after the shooting, Kait’s friends informed us that Kait was upset because her Vietnamese boyfriend, Dung Nguyen, and his friends were “renting cars in California and running into each other to get dirty money.” Kait had sat on that information to protect her boyfriend because she feared that he might be arrested and deported. But something must have occurred that caused her to decide, “Enough is enough!” She was breaking up with Dung on the night she was shot and, therefore, could no longer be counted on to keep silent. We tried to get the Albuquerque PD to investigate that as a possible motive for her murder, but they shrugged it off as impossible. They said they had never heard of any such activity and didn’t think it existed.
Kim: What happened after you voiced your suspicions in WHO KILLED MY DAUGHTER?
Duncan: All hell broke loose in Albuquerque! The police department was furious! Suddenly I was no longer just “a grief-crazed housewife inventing monsters out of dust balls”—other people were taking me seriously. The book became a best seller, and Kait’s case was aired on shows like “Good Morning, America”, “Larry King Live”, and “Unsolved Mysteries.” We were contacted by claims investigators in California who recognized names in my book as people they had been trying to get the goods on for years. The National Insurance Crime Bureau and the Fraud Division of the California State Insurance Agencies attempted to become involved, and so did the FBI. The APD and the Albuquerque DA’s Office refused to cooperate. And we had to ask ourselves, “Why?”
Kim:Were you able to find an answer to that question and, if so, how did you do it?
Duncan: With the help of outside investigators who read my book and volunteered their services pro bono. Those included, not only fraud investigators, but forensic experts, crime scene reconstructionists, and private investigators. We came to regard those wonderful people as “Kait’s Army.” When they started rattling cages and doing background searches, we learned that insurance fraud was the tip of the iceberg. One investigator told us, “The people involved in these insurance scams are almost always involved in other crimes as well.” And he was right. At the time Kait was murdered she was in a position to expose a myriad of criminal activities ranging from arson to car theft to selling black-market computer chips (stolen from manufacturers like Intel) to smuggling heroin from Asia. The drug activity in particular seemed to implicate some people at a very high level. Kait was a powder keg ready to go off. It also became clear that a police cover-up started at the crime scene, possibly even before the shooting occurred. We speculate that some of the activities that Kait was ready to expose either involved or were protected by law enforcement insiders.
Kim: ONE TO THE WOLVES follows WHO KILLED MY DAUGHTER? by 20 years. How does this new book build upon its predecessor, and what made you decide that now was the time to publish it?
Duncan: WHO KILLED MY DAUGHTER? was a “grief book.” ONE TO THE WOLVES is an “action book.” It chronicles all that has occurred since that first book was published. I kept holding back on publication because every time I was ready to submit ONE TO THE WOLVES, we’d receive new information that led to even more avenues that needed exploration. But I couldn’t keep adding chapters indefinitely. The U.S. Justice Department is currently in Albuquerque investigating police corruption. That fact caused me to realize it’s time to get this published.
Kim: Lois, I started reading your latest book with the intent to do so at my leisure: in pieces. Three hours later, having never taken a break, I finished it. It was a whirlwind ride through interviews, forensic reports, record reviews and comparative analysis done by highly skilled investigators. How is it that the “random drive-by shooting” remains as the APD’s final word on your daughter’s death? To me, the evidence is clear. Why is it being ignored?
Duncan: There were questions from the initial reports, those filed in 1989. There were no fingerprints in the car; it had been wiped down. Kait’s shoe was found outside of the car, documented in photos and by the first responders. If she was randomly shot while driving, how did it get there? And with bullets in her brain, who put the car in Park? They were simple things, but critical things. The whole reported scenario made no sense.
Kim: Given that Kait’s case remains unsolved, what specific areas of investigation do you believe warrant follow-up and what do you believe might be the key to uncovering the final truth? For instance, I found the reports on the damage to her car to be so very telling.
Duncan: Police withheld from Kait’s case file a second-day work-up on her car which – according to one homicide detective, who asked that his name not be revealed – proved that Kait was targeted and assassinated. The supervisor of the Criminology Dept. told our P.I. that reports of that second day work-up were given to the homicide and records departments. Those records have disappeared, as have the photos from that work-up. APD now claims no second-day work-up took place. Why this deception? Where are those reports and photos? Why aren’t they in Kait’s case file? Who, at APD, was in a position to mandate a cover-up? And why would anyone do so? Like I said, every time we find another answer, it generates even more questions.
Kim: There were so many other things that you managed to turn up with dogged determination over the past few years, like the witness who responded to Kait’s website and gave you startling new information; yet APD just waved it away. How can that be?
Duncan: You’re referring to the drive-by witness who was in town for a wedding and driving to her motel on the night Kait was murdered. She saw the accident scene. Kait’s car, a police car behind it, a lone officer standing at the open driver’s door, and a girl in the driver’s seat (Kait) sitting up. When the ambulance arrived minutes later, there was no police car, no officer, and Kait was slumped over into the passenger seat. Nothing in those initial reports makes sense, unless ….
Kim: You also have the reports on the bullets and none of that supported the “random drive by shooting” theory either, did it?
Duncan: Not at all. We know that two bullets entered Kait’s head. There were no exit wounds, however no bullets were found in her body. The medical examiner theorized the bullets were of such small caliber that they shattered in Kait’s head, but photos taken clearly show the size of a bullet hole in the car door frame which, according to forensic experts, appears to have been made by a large caliber weapon. Why would a random shooter use two guns? And how would such a random shooter know to pick up the casings? Again, we have only questions that need answering to solve this crime.
Kim: How were you able to obtain the massive amount of records that you did manage to get?
Duncan: It took us five years of submitting Public Records requests to obtain some of the scene photos. Still, we received far fewer than we know were taken. Since when do multiple rolls of scene photos turn into two dozen pictures? And so selectively? We did, however, obtain raw footage of TV news coverage which showed damage to the left rear bumper and side panel of Kait’s car. An outside investigator theorized that she was rammed from behind, causing the car to cross the median and end up on the opposite sidewalk against a pole. The specific damage to the rear bumper suggested a V maneuver used by police when chasing a suspect and trying to stop a car. How can we not suspect foul play? Kait was shot from close range after her car was stationary, not from long range when her car was moving.
Kim: What about the first officers at the scene. Their reports, too, make no sense.
Duncan: Correct. The actions of the first officers at the scene warrant further scrutiny. The first cop to “stumble on the scene” (a violent crimes detective), called in “an accident with no injuries.” A second cop arrived 40 seconds after being dispatched. In other words, she was already there. Does that add up? And a man who had a long record of violent assaults upon women was standing next to Kait’s car when the first officer allegedly arrived; however, he was allowed to leave the scene without being questioned as either a witness or a suspect. When interviewed by our private investigator, that man admitted he was “in the area’” to buy drugs from a man who was the brother of an APD narc. To this day he has never been interviewed by law enforcement. Why?
Kim:You have done an amazing job of gathering documents, statements, and evidence and of identifying new witnesses to various aspects of the case. What next, Lois?
Duncan: It’s been 24 very long years. I believe the key to uncovering the truth is to remove Kait’s case from the jurisdiction of the Albuquerque Police Department and hand it over to the Feds. But we don’t have the power to do that. The Albuquerque PD “owns” Kait’s case, and since murder isn’t a federal crime, federal authorities can’t become involved unless APD invites them in. Meanwhile, our daughter, Kaitlyn Arquette, has become a sort of poster child for hundreds—maybe thousands—of families of murder victims who have been failed by the American Justice System. Most of those families are not in a position to get a book published. Yet their pain and frustration is just as overwhelming as ours. I hope that ONE TO THE WOLVES will be a gift to those families. Kait represents us all.
Editor’s Note: It was 18 years ago that we first ran the story. You can find the original story on the johncooke.com archives. After that issue ran, the SIU community helped push the investigation forward by adding to the massive amounts of information collected. Crooks don’t magically become stellar citizens overnight. They move to other places and do more of the same thing. If you, Mr. Reader, happen to find anything interesting that could in some way connect a few more of the insurance dots, you can reach Lois directly through Kait’s website. Someday, somehow, we are going to learn — beyond any doubt – – Who Killed Kaitlyn Arquette. Twenty-four years is too long for any family to go without a definitive answer … and it’s too long for a murderer to get away with taking a young girl’s life to cover up for ….. LK
