This page illustrates multiple examples of public complaints and lawsuits filed against Marsha Garst.
This section illustrates alleged misconduct by Marsha Garst using public documents.
Read carefully below:
More on the illegal raid and seizure of photographs from the JMU newspaper, “The Breeze”
Response by Marsha Garst regarding the articles above:
It has been posted previously that Virginia state officials stormed the newsroom of James Madison University’s student newspaper, The Daily Breeze, and seized photos relating to a party-turned-melee. After much outrage and legal action, the state has agreed to pay the school’s legal fees, totaling $10,000. The Commonwealth’s attorney, Marsha Garst, admitted she was wrong in her approach but continues to do anything to obtain convictions which is highly illegal
Garst was ordered to pay $10,000 in damages to the JMU Breeze newspaper as a result of the illegal search and seizure
Republican Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and Prosecutor Marsha Garst conflict of interest case leads to dismissal of felony
Exhibit 121 – February 17, 2009 (One month after Hockman’s trial and conviction)
Explanation: Investigator Spitter questions inmate Smith if she lied on the stand. Of course she lies yet again as she had already been released after testifying against Hockman. Telling the truth would have locked her back up and opened the door to Hockman receiving a new trial. (Investigators are trained to detect lying, but Spitter would be held accountable as well if she told the truth so he chose to turn his back on what he knew was the truth.)
Note: Had she taken a polygraph it would have shown she was deceiving Spitter.
Exhibit 174 – August 4, 2011 and August 23, 2011
Explanation: Hockman writes a second request to Marsha Garst asking for documents not received by her before trial. Marsha Garst responds that these items were previously provided to Defense Attorney Bruce Albertson and that because Hockman is incarcerated she is not under obligation to provide them again.
Theory/Fact of Document: Marsha Garst never provided these crucial documents to Hockman’s defense. If she had previously provided them to Albertson then why deny Hockman the same documents. Marsha Garst is covering up the fact that she never provided them previously as it would prove she violated the law and it would grant Hockman a new trial.
911 Important Message July 29, 2008
Explanation: Rebecca Cheryl (Sherrill) called 911 to provide information about Hockman’s case, yet Marsha Garst and Spitler met with her, took her statement, had her listed as a witness at Hockman’s trial but doesn’t hand over the statement to Hockman’s defense. This witness is the only eyewitness to an attack made by Dustin Stanley on Donna Hockman one week before his demise. It’s also worth noting that she told Marsha Garst and Spitler that Stanley had raped her, she had become pregnant, and as a result of that, she had an abortion. She stated, “I have shed no tears for Dustin Stanley and am glad he’s gone.”
Theory/Fact of Document: With that kind of information damaging to Marsha Garst’s case against Hockman it’s no wonder she didn’t want Hockman’s defense to have Rebecca Cheryl’s (Sherrill) statement, as once again it would corroborate Hockman’s testimony.
The link below contains scanned images of news articles published about a case involving a man named Delano Fitz which also involved Marsha Garst. The articles are about intimidation tactics used by Fitz in order to stop other inmates from testifying at trial. Please read them to see what commonly occurs within the walls of prison and tactics used to keep the truth from seeping out for those who need it the most.
Click images to view full-size
And a simple Google search will constantly change as more complaints begin to surface: