Suppressed police files show that Jeff’s prosecution withheld information about suspicious males, and about the victim’s mother, Peggy Garrett.*

Evidence existed, but was suppressed, that: 
-Amber Garrett was stalked by a “creepy guy” who would show-up at her bedroom window, and was followed in the woods by another man. (Exhibit 43 Vol 2, p. 36)
-Amber was subject to importuning, (Exhibit 13b Vol 1, p. 85, and Exhibit 44 Vol 2, p. 40), sexual assault (Exhibit 17, Vol 1 p. 94, and Exhibit 41 Vol 2 p. 30) and rape. (Exhibit 42 Vol 2, p. 31, and Exhibit 54 Vol 2, p. 52)

-Amber had an “older boyfriend” that no one ever investigated. (Exhibit 45 Vol 2 p. 41)
-a man (who lived above Peggy Garrett) predicted that Amber’s body would be found in Bright, Indiana. (Exhibit 59, Vol 2 p.57) 

The prosecution also suppressed reports that Amber’s mother, Peggy Garrett, was involved in Amber’s murder; the reports included information that Peggy may have sold Amber to an individual to whom she owed money for drugs.

During the investigation, several people told police that Peggy Garrett used and dealt drugs. (Exhibit 49, Vol 2 p. 47) Various individuals reported to the police that Peggy Garrett was heavily in debt to the individuals who supplied her drugs. (Exhibits 51-53, Vol 2 pp. 49-51) One report notes that Peggy Garrett was seen ‘doing Coke’ with ‘2 guys: “Bikers”’ at 12.30 a.m. on the day when Amber was reported missing at the Escape bar. (Exhibit 23, Vol 1, p. 108)

The police received reports that Peggy Garrett had sold Amber to someone to whom she owed money for drugs. (e.g. Exhibit 53 Vol 2 P. 51)  One individual informed an investigating officer that Peggy Garrett was in the waffle house crying and stating that she had really “fucked up” because she had sold Amber for fifteen hundred dollars. (Exhibit 56, Vol 2, p. 54)

Another person similarly advised the police that the day prior to Amber’s disappearance, Peggy Garrett was at the Waffle House and had no money; but two days later Peggy returned to the Waffle House claiming to have fifteen hundred dollars in her purse. (Exhibit 57, Vol 2 p. 55)

In addition, a police sergeant was informed that after Amber’s body was found Peggy Garrett stated “He said that he wasn’t going to beat her that bad.” (Exhibit 58, Vol 2, p. 56)

The above is only part of the information concerning Peggy Garrett that was suppressed (for instance, see here.)

Had Jeffrey Wogenstahl’s defense possessed all this information, they could have conducted their own investigation into Peggy Garrett and the men in the police reports; and they could have attacked the reliability of the police investigation for failing to investigate other potential suspects. All this could have changed the verdict at Jeff’s trial.

This extraordinary display of incompetence or worse by the state indicates the only just outcome for Jeff’s case. He should be granted a new trial.

*The information in this post is taken from Appellant Jeffrey Wogenstahl’s Motion to Remand Case to the Trial Court, filed in the Supreme Court of Ohio, October 7, 2016 – Case No. 2016-0423. In the text, Vol 1 refers to Volume 1 of Appendix to Appellant Jeffrey Wogenstahl’s Motion to Remand Case to the Trial Court, filed in the Supreme Court of Ohio, October 7, 2016 – Case No. 2016-0423; and Vol 2 refers to Volume 2 of Appendix to Appellant Jeffrey Wogenstahl’s Motion to Remand Case to the Trial Court, filed in the Supreme Court of Ohio, October 7, 2016 – Case No. 2016-0423.