COLUMBUS, Ohio — According to court documents, Adam Coy’s attorneys believe the prosecution violated Coy’s right to a fair trial.
It all stems from one conversation that a “Use of Force” expert says he had with prosecutors. And the defense says, it’s what didn’t happen next that’s cause for concern.
“It was based on a conversation with the prosecution,” said use of force expert, Jamie Borden.
A conversation that Retired Nevada police officer Jamie Borden says he had months ago with Ohio prosecutors who were investigating the Adam Coy murder trial.
“I did a surface review. I did not do a report because my reports are grounded in a complete and thorough review of all evidence in the case. Well, I didn’t do that in this case. It was a very surface oriented opinion based on what was available to every other citizen in the United States,” said Borden.
The use of force expert says he told prosecutors that based on his surface level analysis of the case, he believed “Coy’s conduct was consistent with a response to a perceived deadly threat”
“I gave a brief consultation on my surface review and analysis of that. That may have been why I wasn’t retained. I don’t know,” said Borden.
But even though prosecutors didn’t retain Borden as a witness, the defense says they also didn’t disclose that conversation either. In a motion that the defense filed on Monday, asking for a new trial, it points to a document where prosecutors said they didn’t know of any evidence that might favor Coy.
“Prosecutors have an official duty to disclose any evidence which is favorable or exculpatory towards the defendant. So even though he wasn’t retained, he did provide an initial analysis that was favorable to the defendants,” said Spectrum News legal analyst, Rory Riley-Topping.
And Spectrum News Legal Analyst Rory Riley-Topping says there’s precedent that could lead to Coy’s convictions being overturned.
“Even though he wasn’t formally an expert witness, you’ve probably heard of the case of Brady versus Maryland,” said Riley-Topping.
That’s a supreme court case that the defense cites in its motion as the reason why Coy should get a new trial. They say, if they had known about Borden’s comments, they would have called him to the stand.
“I don’t know whether I would be able to testify to anything at this point simply because of the magnitude of appearances,” said Borden.
As of now, Coy’s sentencing is scheduled for next Monday but that could change if the judge rules on the defense’s motion before then. We reached out to both the prosecution and the defense counsel, but both declined an interview. Prosecutors say they will be filing a response to the defense’s motion.