In the original trial, a central piece of ‘evidence’ presented to the jury was that little Bryan had bruises all over his body. This was brought forward by the prosecution to support their argument that Little Bryan had been beaten before his death. 

However, recent evidence and research makes clear that the marks on Little Bryan’s body were not the result of abuse. Additionally, recent testimony from pathologist Dr Riddick suggests that the evidence presented to the jury in 2000 had been misrepresented.

Mongolian spots

A picture of black and blue marks on little Bryan’s lower back was presented to the jury in the 2000 trial. It was presumed by both prosecution and defence that these were bruises.

The defence team ignored Tasha stating to them that these were in fact birthmarks that had been seen on other children in the family.

“Over the buttocks and left thigh are zones where the skin is bluish, an incision is made but no hemorrhage is present beneath these.”

– Dr Riddick’s autopsy report of little Bryan (1997)

False testimonies

Dr Odom, the ER doctor, testified in 2000 that he had seen bruises underneath the toddler’s armpits. He stated that ‘there were various stages of resolving bruises under his armpits. Some were three to five days old, and some were within 24 hours’. He then stated that this was in line with Dr Riddick’s autopsy report. This caused the jury to believe that this child had been beaten before he had been killed.

However, unknown to the jury, Dr Riddick’s autopsy report never found bruises under Bryan’s armpits. This was certified by Dr Riddick’s testimony in 2018 where he stated that he never documented injuries under little Bryan’s armpits. Dr Odom’s testimony in Tasha’s trial was false.