*This page and its subsequent tabs review the case in regards to Donna Hockman’s public defender, Bruce Albertson. Please review the documents below and also the sub-categories of this tab, “Attorney-Client Privilege”, “Trial and Appeals” and “Miscellaneous Documents” for additional crucial items relating to the case.
Affidavits:
Exhibit 161 – Stover Affidavit August 28, 2011
Explanation: Becky Stover, sister of Hockman signs an affidavit that Albertson confided to her at his office that he did not do his job for Hockman.
Exhibit 161 – Stover Affidavit August 28, 2011
Exhibit 162 – Litten Affidavit August 29, 2011
Explanation: Jean Litten, mother of Hockman signs an affidavit that Albertson stated to Marsha Garst that she shouldn’t put Chris Hockman on the witness stand due to being a police officer and having knowledge of Hockman’s abuse by Stanley and doing nothing about it. A clear indication of a conflict of interest.
Exhibit 162 Litten Affidavit August 29, 2011
Exhibit 160 – Stover Affidavit August 28, 2011
Explanation: Becky Stover, sister of Hockman signs an affidavit that Albertson confided to her at his office that he did not do his job for Hockman. How would you feel to find out your attorney was assisting Marsha Garst with her case against you?
Exhibit 160 – Stover Affidavit August 28, 2011
Exhibit 163 – Stover Affidavit of conversation with another victim of Stanley’s August 28, 2011
Explanation: Becky Stover, Hockman’s sister had phone conversations with a female claiming to have received a threatening voicemail and text messages from Stanley as well as being pregnant with twins from a sexual attack perpetrated by Stanley. This female also indicated to Stover that she witnessed Hockman being attacked by Stanley one week before Stanley’s demise.
The girl was never called to testify and may well be the only witness to have seen Hockman being attacked by Stanley. Testimony from this woman could have significantly impacted Hockman’s trial and verdict.
Exhibit 163 – Stover Affidavit of conversation with another victim of Stanley’s August 28, 2011
Exhibit 150 – Booth Affidavit of conversation Robertson September 1, 2011
Explanation: This affidavit is of yet another witness that would have shed light on the abusive behavior of Stanley. It’s a shame that Hockman has uncovered evidence and witnesses from prison that a PI wad paid to find and was in the free world.
Exhibit 150 – Booth Affidavit of conversation Robertson September 1, 2011
Exhibit 35 – Statement of Bush to Albertson October 2, 2008
Explanation: This statement sent to Hockman’s attorney on October 8, 2008, clearly indicates a conspiracy of offenders working together to lie on the stand against Hockman. Albertson never put this woman on the witness stand to help expose the lying inmates to Hockman’s jury.
Exhibit 35 – Statement of Bush to Albertson October 2, 2008
Exhibit 122 – Affidavit, Exhibit 123 Statement of Crystal Woods
Explanation: Crystal Woods was incarcerated with Hockman before trial. The fact that she told numerous people including a Commonwealth Attorney, defense attorney, two investigators, and an intern about inmates lying about Hockman and none of them felt compelled to come to Hockman’s defense attorney or a judge shows the lengths willing to be taken to cover up conspiring of inmates to send a woman to her impending death. Do you believe the truth would have set you free knowing what these people kept secret? Would her testimony have made a dent in the credibility of all these lying inmates?
Exhibit 122 – Affidavit, Exhibit 123 Statement of Crystal Woods
Exhibit 50 – Defense Strategies
Explanation: This confidential work product is put together after an attorney has met his client and has a grasp on what his defense will be for them. After being sent to prison, Hockman received this document. Reviewing it reveals the lack of commitment Albertson put into his defense of Hockman, as none of the 9 tasks were completed. A breakdown of what could have been revealed had he followed:
- Mitigation evidence could have shown the state of mind at the time of the shooting.
- A psych Dr. meeting Hockman would have shown the jury what she endured during her relationship with Dustin Stanley.
- A domestic violence expert could have educated a jury on the signs and symptoms of PTSD to corroborate Hockman’s testimony.
- A review of the case Walter Green received, an acquittal about circumstances similar to Hockman would have given Albertson an advantage on how to present Hockman’s case, especially since a woman was involved in that case as well.
- Hockman was never interviewed with regards to her upbringing and childhood or relationships with others throughout the years.
- Again these persons have not been interviewed extensively especially not Hockman’s parents or children.
- No women who dated Dustin Stanley were interviewed by Albertson and had they been it would have shown a jury a pattern of abusive behavior by Stanley.
- Had procedural, forensic, and ballistics review been conducted it would have shown all the shoddy work done by Marsha Garst’s team.
- Had a polygraph (despite not being admissible) could’ve been revealed to the public.
Commonwealth Coverup 