• Diego Olmos Alcalde is charged in the 1997 murder of Susannah Chase.



BOULDER, Colo. –

Defense attorneys for Diego Olmos Alcalde, suspected in the 1997 slaying of Susannah Chase, might refute DNA evidence linking him to the crime by saying the two had consensual sex before someone else killed her, prosecutors told a judge Monday.

That’s why jurors in Alcalde’s June murder trial need to hear from several women who claim they, too, were attacked by Alcalde, showing a pattern a “hatred of women,” Boulder County deputy district attorney Amy Okubo told District Judge James Klein during a motions hearing.

“They’re gonna come in here and say that, because the DNA inside of her is irrefutable, he had sex with her, but some other person came along and killed her,” Okubo said.

Defendants’ criminal histories aren’t usually admitted during trials, but state law says there’s a greater need to expose evidence of other relevant acts when prosecuting sex crimes because “sex offenders are extremely habituated.”

Klein is expected to issue a written ruling on this and several other motions heard by the court earlier this month.

Alcalde, 39, was arrested in January 2008 on suspicion of raping and fatally beating Chase, a 23-year-old University of Colorado student, more than 10 years earlier. He faces charges of first-degree murder, first-degree sexual assault and second-degree kidnapping after a DNA sample he was required to submit because of an unrelated kidnapping conviction matched semen recovered from Chase’s body.

Alcalde was accused in four other attacks, but only convicted in one.

He has maintained his innocence in the Chase case and told investigators he wasn’t in Boulder when the crime occurred. But, Okubo said, Alcalde in the past has either blamed women who made sexual-assault allegations against him or said the sexual encounters were consensual.

“He was already laying the consent defense, which the people suspect he will lay in this case as well,” Okubo said.

In a tape-recorded conversation with a Chilean reporter, Alcalde said he didn’t remember whether he had sex with Chase that night.

“The truth is, I have been very lucky with women in the past,” Alcalde said to the reporter, according to Okubo. “You can be with a woman one night and then, after that, it is, ‘See ya.'”

Alcalde’s attorneys Monday didn’t dispute that they could raise a consensual-sex defense, but defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan said Alcalde’s criminal history shouldn’t be allowed because the prosecution is trying to paint a “bad character” portrait of her client.

Mulligan also said the prior alleged assaults have as many differences as they have similarities.

None of the women who say they were assaulted by Alcalde were the same age, same race, wore the same type of clothes or were assaulted in the same time of year or location. And, Mulligan said, they aren’t similar to Chase’s killing.

“Not one of the other similar actions involved death or even a serious attempt to cause death,” she said.

Contact Camera Staff Writer Vanessa Miller at 303-473-1329 or millerv@dailycamera.com.

Susannah Chase Case

Archived comments

Consensual-sex with this dude? If I were his lawyer, I’d be wary about insulting the jurors’ intelligence with that one.


3/30/2009 9:15:11 PM

When I was called for jury duty, I answered all the questions honestly, I told them of my employment and college education, and they dismissed me.The 19-year-old girl who was next to me and who shrugged “I don’t know” to almost all the lawyers questions was selected for the trial.I don’t think lawyers worry about insulting a jury’s intelligence.


3/30/2009 9:55:05 PM

So THAT’S what happened! Obviously…


3/30/2009 10:00:59 PM

hahahahahhaha… seriously????


3/30/2009 11:08:54 PM

Defense attorneys like this are degenerates….


3/30/2009 11:16:00 PM

Ya I believe that Suzanne had sex with this stranger right after walking home from HER BOYFRIEND

and then some other guy came by an killed her for absolutely no reason.


3/31/2009 12:37:31 AM



3/31/2009 12:38:06 AM

Is it relevant how soon on in his statements he said he DID have sex with her and when and where and how that could be validated? Because it is incriminating that HE NEVER DID claim that until he was caught by the DNA. And if the argument was that it would look suspicious considering the circumstances–SO WHAT, it looks MORE suspicious if he changes his story.Unless the defense argues the DNA is

wrong for some reason.

If he wasn’t in Boulder, where was he having sex with her and when and with what alibis? Sperm only lasts so long.And what was that about the baseball bat tip? Lot of coincidences going on here. Sure like to get a story out of this guy and see him contradict himself.


3/31/2009 12:55:33 AM

If the stranger defense doesn’t work, he might suggest suicide next.


3/31/2009 6:43:44 AM

A black-eyed Devil is what this dude is.Strikingly similar mug shot to that creep who is also in jail for killing that 14 year old girl in Broomfield.

After he is convicted, he should be hung in the middle of the Pearl Street mall.


3/31/2009 7:36:27 AM

So you are going to convict his looks?THISis why statements should be removed.


3/31/2009 8:05:18 AM

Is this a joke?I thought the police investigation was bad, yet this strategy takes the cake.

Does anyone wonder how people from across the country view Boulder?


3/31/2009 8:21:24 AM


I hope Alcade’s FEMALE defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan can live with herself after this. She has does have a choice. No one needs career advancement that desperately.


3/31/2009 8:33:40 AM

Mary Claire Mulligan.. you are the type of lawyer that lawyer jokes are made for.Hope you enjoy the bottom of the sea. i say they let this guy go free…on ONE condition…he takes his future hatred out on his current lawyer and others just like her


3/31/2009 8:46:14 AM

Mary Claire Mulligan, shame on you.

You have to defend this slimeball, but judging from previous articles, you’re a traitor to your own sex coming up with the kind of defense strategies you’re using – the same crap the “good old boys” used to haul out on rape victims forty or fifty years ago.And now you’re coming up with this to try and refute DNA evidence. You may think it’s clever, but in truth it’s an unforgivable slur on Ms. Chase’s character.This man is a previously convicted sex offender – this sort of defense is, thankfully, pretty implausable.It’s also disgusting.

How could you?Yikes.


3/31/2009 8:59:32 AM

“..defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan said Alcalde’s criminal history shouldn’t be allowed because the prosecution is trying to paint a “bad character” portrait of her client.”

Umm, he’s doing fine just on his own.He’s a habitual scumbag, nobody is painting him anything that he isn’t painting himself.


3/31/2009 9:24:22 AM

“Innocent until proven guilty” is Arcade’s right, but it’s undeniably weak in this case given his indisputable record. I wonder how well Mary Claire Mulligan knows it.

“He has the right to a good defence” may be applicable in the abstract, but he is not being defended by an imaginary lawyer, he’s being defended by Mary Claire Mulligan.


3/31/2009 9:25:25 AM

Hey Lynn,

I could care less what you think.I was not convicting him based upon his looks, a jury will based upon the facts.

I grow tired of imbeciles such as yourself reading things into my posts; get off your holier than thou perch and sit with us little people for awhile.


3/31/2009 9:29:59 AM


Wow. I don’t even know how to respond to your comment. Mary Claire Mulligan is doing her job, as distasteful as it might be to many of us. You suggest that she be raped and murdered for this?

This is the criminal justice system at work. You should direct your criticisms there rather than personalize them.


3/31/2009 9:31:18 AM

theatv tried: “Does anyone wonder how people from across the country view Boulder?”

No, not really.Don’t you have a newspaper where you live?

Yes, this defense strategy is unbelievable.But that’s how the judicial system works.You’d be glad you had a vigorous, creative defense lawyer if you were accused of something, rightly or wrongly.


3/31/2009 9:31:55 AM


Being a public defender and taking the job seriously makes Mary Claire Mulligan someone we should all praise, even while we hope Alcade is found guilty.

You seem to wish this trial were taking place in Iran.Me, I’m glad I live in America.


3/31/2009 9:36:05 AM

“…defense attorney Mary Claire Mulligan said Alcalde’s criminal history shouldn’t be allowed because the prosecution is trying to paint a “bad character” portrait of her client.”

So is she going to paint a “fine citizen character” portrait?I’d like to be in the courtroom to witness this defense, but taking into consideration how the jury was chosen I’ll speculate that she just might be able to deliver such a defense.


3/31/2009 9:53:06 AM

Mary Claire Mulligan can live as she wishes. We don’t have to like it or listen to your naive diatribes Ogghead.

Designers of weapons of mass destruction take their jobs seriously, and they never use those weapons themselves so I guess that makes everything OK.

It is unfortunate that in the case of lawyers and weapons designers, “serious” usually equates to “amoral” in our society, i.e., a job well done is more important than any moral implications of the outcome of your talent.

In the end society suffers.


3/31/2009 9:56:55 AM

Lynn’s got the hots.


3/31/2009 10:01:20 AM

Letssee, first he claims he wasnt in Boulder…then doesnt remember, then had sex with her- a complete stranger ??

Riggggggt !


3/31/2009 10:12:59 AM

I am SURE that she was into having sex with SLIME after she scrapped it off the bottom of some bucket!!!!!!



3/31/2009 10:14:03 AM

“You’d be glad you had a vigorous, creative defense lawyer if you were accused of something, rightly or wrongly.”

A criminals glee or glumness shouldn’t sully the pursuit of actual justice.

Which, significantly, few lawyers actually reference-preferring instead to intone regarding the “law”-which they helped write, encode, interpret and apply.

Was Karla Homolka’s lawyer ‘good’ in that he got her a sweetheart plea deal while hiding the incriminating evidence that would have sentenced her appropriately-if not ‘justly’?

Tellingly he would have been deemed a ‘bad’ lawyer or even been disbarred if he had offered up that evidence freely.

Is justice & law a football game where only winning counts and couches and quarterbacks are the point and stars, as opposed to fans or victims?

What’s certain is that Susannah will be ravaged again in court as this lawyer trashes her in order to protect trash. That’s not right or just and that’s our justice system, too-as rendered by too many lawyers over too much time.


3/31/2009 2:03:55 PM

The many people who loved Susannah chase will not allow her to be “ravished” by the defense. This young woman was a kind soul who had a bright future ahead of her & there will be a line of people to testify to on her behalf & to speak to her character. Myself included.


3/31/2009 3:11:58 PM

Ms Mulligan is not a public defender.She chose to take this case.



3/31/2009 4:56:35 PM