I will get to why Adam’s trial attorney Bob Peters submitted a factualy incorrect Statement of the evidence when he filed on direct appeal.
But first I want to show you the law.
- f) Approval of the Record by the Trial Judge or Chancellor. The trial judge shall approve the transcript or statement of the evidence and shall authenticate the exhibits as soon as practicable after the filing thereof or after the expiration of the 15-day period for objections by appellee, as the case may be, but in all events within 30 days after the expiration of said period for filing objections. Otherwise the transcript or statement of the evidence and the exhibits shall be deemed to have been approved and shall be so considered by the appellate court, except in cases where such approval did not occur by reason of the death or inability to act of the trial judge. In the event of such death or inability to act, a successor or replacement judge of the court in which the case was tried shall perform the duties of the trial judge, including approval of the record or the granting of any other appropriate relief, or the ordering of a new trial. Authentication of a deposition authenticates all exhibits to the deposition. The trial court clerk shall send the trial judge transcripts of evidence and statements of evidence.
The Trial judge being Judge Buddy Perry.
I have checked the appellate, record and everything is correct except two major errors detrimental to Adam Braseel. An odd coincidence to say the least.
This record has remained in error since 2009. This is what the criminal court of appeals references when making their decisions. Not the transcripts.
At trial, Kirk Braden said he saw a car with a particular dent in it. One that Adam Braseel’s car had. However, it is now known that Kirk never identified a dent until after he saw Adams car in the Sheriff parking lot. But be that as it may, that is what he testified to and the prosecutor pointed out that Kirk worked at his uncle don’s body shop and so he would be real good at spotting dents.
In ascertaining the credibility of Kirk Braden’s identification, the higher court would look to the statement of evidence to see if there was anything to corroborate his statements. And there is. Though it is false evidence that is in direct conflict with the trial transcript.
The appellate judges took from the appellate court record that Angie White saw a car with a dent in it. When the reality is she said the car she saw did not have a dent.
The summation of evidence states that:
“on January 6, 2006, she noticed an unfamiliar gold vehicle with a dent in the front parked in
her yard facing toward the victim’s house.”
This is simply not true.
The appellate judges don’t sit around reading trial transcripts. They assume the summation is correct as it has been submitted at the request of defense on direct appeal and approved by both the defense and the trial judge.
But it is not correct and anyone can compare the two to know this.
This a very serious problem, but perhaps not as serious as the next one.
The appellate court record gives SGT Troy Brown as the investigative officer who discovered the body.
Anyone following this case knows that it is Sgt Mike Brown who was the investigative officer.
And anyone who skimmed the index of the trial transcript would see that Sgt Troy Brown did testify. Though to nothing more than he went to the Braseel house in Estill springs to look for Adam.
While this might be a little hard to follow if you were not at the trial. The ones who were at the trail are the ones responsible for the errors.
How is it possible for both the defense and the trial judge to get this wrong?
It would be one thing if it could be viewed as a simple mistake.
But since there is a major question now of why Mike Brown was not called to testify by either the defense or the prosecution — when he was the only investigative offices who talked to the witnesses and he was alone when he discovered the body and now we know he says the wallet was on the body when he found it.
In the latest appeal the attorney general once again cited these so called “Statements of the evidence” that are false and you have seen what happened again.
One can’t help but think there is much more to this. And we will get to that.
Here is the trial transcript of Angie White’s testimony.
DON’T PRESS THE BIG BLUE BUTTON PRESS THE GREEN LINK UNDER DOWNLOAD FILE
Link to 2009 appeal to see summation of evidence. Under background. Then later using that same false information to make their conclusions using the dent at every turn.