The “more than?” Ineffective Counsel of Adam Braseel – Peters – Davis et al

Bob Peters told several people including myself that the damning thing against Adam Braseel was the fact that Becky Hill took the stand, looked at Adam and said “That’s him – he did it.”

Peters, when he says this, comes off as one who is detached. As if he is a mere spectator or even the prosecutor – but he is not – he is one of the two lawyers who after receiving a large sum of money from the Braseels were supposed to defend Adam. And in this case the main job would be to question (impeach) the witnesses against him. Of which they failed to do in such an extraordinary failure it raises questions beyond sheer incompetence.

For example: How hard would it have been to find out what type of car the victim, Malcolm Burrows drove?

And if you bothered to find this out.

How hard would it be to realize that Becky Hill’s testimony is designed to evade this very vehicle.

Hill says Malcolm took HER car to drive 100 yards up  a dead end road because “his van weren’t registered.”

One simple question to Hill and everyone goes home right there and then.

But Ms Hill, Malcolm owned and drove a Chevy Blazer registered in his name, we have witnesses who saw him driving it in the days surrounding the murder.

Ms Hill, what happened to Malcolm’s vehicle Why does your story go out of the way to leave out Maclolm’s actual vehicle. According to your testimony Malcolm was driving around town all day shopping – now he wasn’t doing this in in your hot wired car or an unregistered van was he?

No, of course not, he would drive his fully registered vehicle, a Chevy Blazer which I show you the paper work of right here.



Malcolm did not drive off down the road with any man in your ca like you said did he?

Well no, I guess your right.

In fact if anyone should be looked at for killing a person found next to a car on the side of the road, it should be the owner of that very car. Becky Hill, and I suspect that this car of hers, with false registration was driven by her son Kirk, as he seemed to be at the crime scene with no mode of transportation or car of his own, proven by the fact that his brother had to pick him up.

Now I can see the prosecution wanting to hide this, and certainly those pinning a crime on Adam to get away with murder would, but how does his own defense manage to not know the victims car was missing the day of the murder – you would think for 60k the dullest buffoon could manage this.

Perhaps there is more to the connection of the defense lawyers to a Burrows Lawyer, Nelson Layne that bears further examining.

In fact I can see at no point where the defense was a friend to Adam Braseel and to this day had helped spread unfounded rumors.



It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestEmail this to someone