Hi, I have absolute proof that the lead investigator and prosecutor committed perjury in my husbands federal trial. This was a texting case and the texts were the main evidence. They stated they sent a preservation letter to Verizon for all texts involved in the case, then a search warrant to obtain the results(8 months later). The main argument that consumed the trial was the fact that they testified they never received the last two days of texts leading to the arrest. His attorney spent half of the 2 1/2 day trial arguing that these were exculpatory. In trial both the investigator and prosecutor testified that these two days were never given to them, when asked by the attorney and the judge. We always knew they were hiding those from us and they even said they did a download of his phone but were not putting it into evidence. I just discovered the original search warrant which asked for all texts presented in evidence except for those last two days which they claimed over and over that they didn't exist because Verizon just never gave them to them and that they couldn't produce in court what Verizon never gave them. We are in 2255 now for other issues. Thanks, Michelle
If you have access to them you should have produced them. If they have his phone, it should have been demanded. The prosecutor is not the sole source of evidence. This story seems to not make sense. The fact that this question indicates that you do not know the contents of the texts is also peculiar. If your husband knows what these texts said and that it is exculpatory, his attorney would have either gotten them or substantiated the claim of exculpatory evidence. The first place to start is with your husbend. He knows what his texts said, it sounds like you do not know what the contents were. From having heard this type of story before, it sounds like his lawyer cannot disclose something to you that is privileged and (as terrible as it sounds) your husband might not be telling you the whole story. If he knows the contents of his own texts and it exculpates him--he needs to get his attorney on it ASAP.
The prosecution does not get to withhold this type of evidence.
However, the fact that these were just "requested" but not produced is not proof the state has it but concealed it. If these were your husbands texts and they are exculpatory--you'd know what is in them. He would have told you and it would be stated in the question. The fact that something exists that might not have been produced in the absence of exculpatory content, unfortunately, will not alter the result.
If you can produce something in these texts that exculpates him, then, yes it could change the outcome.
So your evidence that the police lied when they said Verizon never gave them evidence is that they never asked for it? That's not proof of perjury.
How many search warrants were there?
I am a former federal and State prosecutor and have been handling criminal defense and personal injury cases for over 18 years. The above answer, and any follow up comments or emails, is for informational purposes only and not meant as legal advice.
Your post is a bit confusing but it sounds like you are possibly talking about what is referred to as a Brady Violation. You can find a synopsis of some of the leading cases on Brady Violations at:
I suggest you speak to your husband about the issues you raise in your post. He is in the best position to advise you and your husband.
The information provided is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information related to legal issues commonly encountered. The information is not guaranteed to be correct, complete, or current. I make no warranty, expressed or implied, about the accuracy or reliability of the information. You should not act or rely on any information at above without seeking the advice of an attorney. The determination of whether you need legal services and your choice of a lawyer are very important matters that should not be based on websites or advertisement
Years licensed, work experience, educationLegal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awardsLegal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagementsDiscipline