Unfair trial

Everyone has a right to a fair trial. However, in Tasha’s case, there was no fair trial. This was one of the factors that led to her wrongful conviction.

The jury

The role of the jury is to be able to analyze the evidence and be able to come to a reliable verdict. Therefore, it is important to have an impartial jury. However, in Tasha’s case, the jury was far from impartial. 

Recent research has revealed that some of the jurors knew the key players in the case outside of the courtroom. This included one of the jurors’ sister-in-law being related to little Bryan and therefore, she was sitting in on the trial. When the juror told the judge and stated they would be able to remain impartial, the judge did not rule them out. 

Not just that, a juror knew one of the character witnesses. Two weeks prior to the trial, the witness had fired the juror for bad behaviour. When raised with the defence team that the juror had not disclosed the relationship with the witness, the attorneys stated that it was too late to get the juror off. 

Missing evidence

Two crucial pieces of evidence were never presented to the jury. 

One was Tasha’s diary. In this diary, Tasha had noted worries about little Bryan’s behaviour weeks prior to his death. This included behaviours such as rolling his eyes, forgetting things he had learnt, and staring into the distance. This would have been key to Tasha’s case as it shows evidence that Bryan was experiencing seizures or some other neurological issue. 

Another piece of evidence missing is the family’s calendar. This calendar detailed a neurologist appointment that had been scheduled which shows that Tasha had concerns for Bryan’s health. 

However, both of these documents are missing. They have never been recovered nor was it shown to the jury.

The original defence team

Tasha’s lawyers were court-appointed to represent her at the start of her trial. However, the lawyers were not keen to represent Tasha as they were overworked with another capital murder trial. Despite the lawyers telling the judge this, the judge carried on with the trial with these overtaxed attorneys. 

Tasha and her family witnessed a lack of interest in the case from the lawyers. Tasha had told them from the start how she believes little Bryan died accidentally from a seizure disorder. Instead of believing Tasha and following her line, they told Tasha to snitch on Bryan’s father as being the responsible party for Bryan’s death. Tasha refused as she believes in his innocence. 

Throughout the trial, Tasha was ignored by her lawyers continually. During the voir dire, Tasha objected to a juror and wanted him struck out. This was ignored and led to the juror becoming the foreperson. She had told her lawyers during the trial that Bryan had seizures, asthma and Mongolian spots. This was all ignored.