Faulty & Secret Evidence

Prosecutorial Misconduct, Brady Violations, and Giglio Misrepresentation

For over a year, the State Attorney’s Office has refused to release full body camera footage—footage that contradicts the alleged victim’s story and supports the defendant's claim of innocence. Despite repeated requests through formal letters, motions, and emails submitted to the Public Defender’s Office, multiple judges, and the prosecution, the evidence remains withheld.

Under Brady v. Maryland, prosecutors are legally obligated to disclose any evidence that could exonerate a defendant. Under Giglio v. United States, they must reveal information that undermines the credibility of their witnesses. In this case, the police report itself contradicts the alleged victim’s claims. If prosecutors reviewed both the report and the body camera footage, as required by law, they knowingly relied on unreliable evidence to secure a conviction.

The refusal to release this footage raises serious concerns about secret evidence—critical material that the State used in prosecution but has actively blocked from defense access. To make matters worse, the defendant is now required to pay $117 to obtain the very evidence that would prove his  innocence.

How can the State utilize public resources to secure convictions at no cost, yet demand payment for access to exculpatory evidence?

This constitutes a clear Brady and Giglio violation, underscoring a fundamental breach of justice. Justice means transparency—not the suppression or monetization of the truth.