Documents

AFFIDAVITS & INTERVIEWS

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8

WHITE TRUCK STATEMENTS

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4*
• 5 
• 6

*Note the time on this, then note Gary Washburn's statement below under "alibi statements." Keep in mind that it's 18+ miles from the corner where the officer saw Stuart to the Naab trailer. And the road to the Naab trailer is some rough, slow driving. See the timeline video under the media section. (Click here for part 1)


ALIBI STATEMENTS

• 1
• 2

The secretary said Stuart picked up the estimate around 11:00. The truck was already at the Naab residence. Stuart could not be 2 places at once! Why did Sheafor refuse to acknowledge this?

• 1

Why did no one take her statement? Why did they insist Stuart had no alibi for the time the truck was at the Naab trailer? Several people who knew very well who Stuart was talked to him, waved to him, interacted with him ... during the time the white truck was already at the trailer. What is wrong with this picture???

EVIDENTIARY HEARING

• Part 1
• Part 2
• Part 3
• Part 4
• Part 5
• Part 6
• Part 7
• Part 8
• Part 9
• Part 10

MOTIONS

• Motion to Supplement

CORRESPONDENCE

• Jenner and Block letter

MISCELLANEOUS COURT TRANSCRIPTS

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Negative for semen and blood

(Note ... we asked Stuart what the small reddish stain on his tennis shoe might have been. He said he had attended a sporting event that week and had eaten a hot dog. Some of the ketchup dripped onto his shoe. Why didn't his defense have a chemical analysis done on the spot on his shoe to show it was ketchup?? Of course there wasn't enough "present for a DNA test" if it was ketchup! Furthermore, had he been the killer, he would have had blood everywhere. His shoes would have been soaked in her blood.)

• Negative for blood, mention of scissors
• More about the scissors

(hello ... who really cares about the semen!? That only proves she had sex at some point at the very "best," and someone mixed up evidence at the other end of the spectrum. People mangled that part so much, it should not even be admissible. But this murder should be about blood evidence and fingerprint evidence (and eye witness evidence would be great, too, if the cowards who watched that man murder Krystal would start telling the truth!). What about the blood on these scissors? DNA can be separated out. It should have the victim's blood and the assailant's blood on it. It was negative for Stuart's, so ... whose blood is on those scissors, Mr. Sheafor???

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS

• Blood table of results