Evidence detailed in Craigslist killing

These are among the items noted in a cryptic list of evidence prosecutors have provided lawyers for Markoff, the 23-year-old Boston University medical student who has been charged with kidnapping and murder, according a court document.

Copies of more than 170 pieces of evidence, including police reports, fingerprint reports, and cellphone receipts, were handed over to Markoff’s lawyers on May 19, according to the court document known as the notice of discovery.

The 16-page document was filed Tuesday, the same day that Markoff’s lawyer, John Salsberg, unsuccessfully argued to have the notice of discovery impounded. He has complained that the enormous publicity surrounding his client’s case could make it hard to find an impartial jury. Markoff has pleaded not guilty to charges of kidnapping and murder. He is accused of fatally shooting 25-year-old Julissa Brisman, a New York masseuse he allegedly met through Craigslist in a Back Bay hotel. Salsberg could not immediately be reached for comment yesterday.

The notice of discovery is a form that states the evidence the Suffolk district attorney’s office has against a defendant and has provided to the defense. Jake Wark, spokesman for Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley, declined to comment on the document. “We won’t be elaborating on any of the notices of discovery,’’ he said.

The $4,500, casino bills, and check were found during searches of Markoff’s property. The notice of discovery did not elaborate on where Markoff might have acquired so much cash. Law enforcement officials have said that Markoff was an avid gambler who was heading to Foxwoods Casino with his fiancee, Megan McAllister, when he was arrested April 20. The bills from Foxwoods were dated March 3 and March 12, according to the notice. There were also two other evidence items listed mentioning Foxwoods, which were described as CDs. One was dated April 16, two days after Brisman was killed, and the other was dated April 17 to April 18. CDs could include video or audio surveillance as well as copies of document files, like receipts.

According to the notice, the police searches were conducted at Markoff’s apartment in Quincy, his locker at Boston University, and the cars he drove, including a Toyota Corolla registered to his mother and a Chevy Trailblazer registered to McAllister’s father.

Prosecutors also provided defense lawyers with copies of 90 stills from surveillance taken at the Copley Marriott, where Brisman was shot.

There were also stills from Copley Place and Prudential Center, the shopping areas adjacent to the hotel. In addition, prosecutors provided copies of the eight photographs Markoff’s two other alleged victims viewed to identify their attacker.

Markoff is accused of tying up and robbing a Las Vegas prostitute at the Westin hotel in Boston four days before Brisman was killed. Two days after Brisman’s shooting, police say, Markoff struck again, this time in Rhode Island, where they said he held up a prostitute and tried to rob her. All of the victims advertised erotic services through Craigslist, which is how Markoff allegedly found them, according to police.

One piece of evidence was a copy of a printout for a posting on Craigslist that read, “Hot Brunette Model & Masseuse - visiting Today. [sic]’’

Salsberg, Markoff’s lawyer, told Suffolk Superior Court Judge Frank Gaziano that he feared that any document filed in court regarding his client’s case would find its way into the media. Salsberg also filed a motion asking prosecutors to ensure that the grand jury, which indicted Markoff last Thursday, was not influenced by leaks from law enforcement officials to reporters. Gaziano denied the motion to impound the document, but said he would consider Salsberg’s motion regarding the grand jury. He also temporarily approved a motion to impound the prosecution’s statement of the case.

Assistant District Attorney Edmond Zabin told Gaziano that given the large amount of evidence police have against Markoff “it is quite a stretch to say that the grand jury’s determination of probable cause was tainted by media coverage of the case.’’