In this same version of Chuck's story, he claimed that Dallas Mallory saw him and Ryan leave the Tribune parking lot, walking north and west just a few seconds after the crime. He said they stopped and talked with Mallory near the Break-Time, which is located about a quarter of a block from the Tribune.

Because it was Halloween night, Chuck said that Dallas Mallory had been wearing a police uniform costume.

Please note that Chuck and Dallas had been at the same Halloween party earlier in the evening before ever encountering Ryan.

Chuck and Dallas did not know each other well and did not hang out together at the party but they ended up together in a photo taken sometime during the evening. We have a copy of this photograph.

The key point here is that Dallas Mallory told police emphatically that he did not see Chuck that night. In fact, he wasn't even sure who Chuck was and he could not understand how Chuck knew he had been wearing a police uniform.

Dallas stated to the police he thought Erickson may have seen him but Mallory insisted he had not seen Erickson and certainly had not spoken to Erickson.

It wasn't until December of 2004 that Dallas finally understood how Erickson knew about the police uniform. This was when Mallory was shown a photo of himself and Erickson together at the party. In this picture Mallory was wearing the police costume.

The photo had been taken several hours before the crime occurred. Mallory had not remembered this photo being taken. Once he saw the photo it all began to make sense and he understood that Erickson had not seen him at the intersection of Providence and Ash but at the party earlier that evening.

This is why Mallory's statements to the police are somewhat confusing. The important fact to be gleaned from this is that Mallory never saw Erickson downtown and never spoke to him downtown. He also never spoke to or saw Ryan Ferguson.

This is why the prosecutor never called Mallory to the witness stand.

We have found by reading the police reports and comparing them with our taped interview or depositions police changing an original report by adding fabricated information to help them make their case.

We have many examples of false reports

Please note the police never have the witnesses read the report, or provide them with a copy or have the witness sign the report.

This allows the police the opportunity to modify the report to suit their on purposes without the witnesses knowing.

Please note that Chuck alleges to have taken this route (parking lot to Providence and Ash and on the By George Night Club arriving after 2:30am) in several of his first police interviews (Police Report 254, p. 7, the first video interview at 10:05 a.m., and the second police drive-around video interview at 3:29 p.m.)

Chuck later changed his story October 1, 2004, saying that he saw Dallas in a car stopped at a red light at a different intersection, (Providence and Locust) four blocks to the south of his first claim.

In both versions, Chuck said he conversed with Dallas. He also said that there were two girls riding in the car with him. To date, no one has identified the female companions or confirmed they even exist.

Erickson never described the car or the two girls.

Records from the Missouri Department of Transportation show that the red light that Chuck described at the first and second location was actually a flashing yellow signal at that time of the night. These documents are a part of the court record. 

Therefore, Dallas Mallory would have had no need to stop.

The plausibility of Chuck's conversation with Dallas Mallory defies any logic.

What are the odds that Erickson would murder someone, be covered in blood, run from the crime scene to a car stopped at a flashing yellow light, in the middle of a busy intersection, and have a conversation with someone dressed in a police uniform, with two other people in the car (who by the way, have NEVER been identified)!!!

THIS DEFIES RATIONAL CREDIBILITY!

Dallas Mallory, the only person who would be able to corroborate any part of Chuck's story provided a sworn affidavit dated Dec. 1, 2004, stating that he told the police on March 10, 2004 that he never saw Chuck Erickson or Ryan Ferguson downtown at any time during the day or night.

Dallas says in his affidavit he never was near the Break-Time at Ash and Providence (which Chuck says in his first statement) or on Locust and Providence (as per Chuck's revised story from Oct.1, 2004) late on Oct. 31st or in the early morning hours of November 1, 2001.

See Police Report 332 (Chuck's revised October 1, 2004 statement)

In his sworn affidavit, Dallas Mallory said that he did not have a valid driver's license and would not have been driving that night. He had also sold his car before Nov. 1, 2001. (Dallas Mallory's affidavit)

We have since spoken to this former employee and he has provided us with a sworn affidavit stating he was never present at the By George Night Club after 2:15am any night during his two years of employment at the club. Just another incorrect detail in Erickson's dream. !!!!!! Amazing!!!!!

So is the doorman wrong or Erickson?

Is Dallas Mallory wrong or Erickson?

Is Michael Boyd wrong or Erickson?

Police Report No. 42, describes how the K-9 tracking dog led the police south on Fourth Street from the Tribune parking lot, which was the opposite direction that Chuck told police he and Ryan went in his initial statement the morning of his arrest.

It wasn't until Chuck's Oct.1, 2004 proffer (Police Report 332) - and after he read the police reports which he received as a part of discovery - that he first became aware that a police dog tracked the perpetrators south down 4th Street on the night of the crime.

That's when Chuck Erickson changed his story to match the report of the K-9 tracking dog and said he traveled the same route that the tracking dog had taken.

But even though Erickson changed his story to match the initial direction taken by the tracking dog, the two paths eventually went off in two different and distinct directions.

The police dog initially followed the trail south down 4th Street. As per police report 42, the tracking dogs began their search at the mouth of the alley, NOT at the site of the victim's body. This in an important fact to note.

After crossing Broadway, the dogs traveled behind the diner and due south to Locust.

At this point the dog handler says that his dog "began sniffing and pulling aggressively, displaying to me he had again located the scent of the man we were tracking."

On the other hand, Chuck said he continued down 4th Street, to the diner then headed west to Flat Branch Park, crossing the creek which runs north and south and up the embankment to the intersection of Providence and Locust.

Meanwhile, the K-9 Police dogs continued south to the University of Missouri and more specifically, to McReynolds Hall.