Introduction
Byron Case (now known as Missouri Department of Corrections Inmate No. 328416) shot and killed Anastasia WitbolsFeugen on the night of October
22, 1997. He was arrested and charged with the murder on June 11, 2001, and convicted by jury trial of Murder in
the First Degree and of Armed Criminal Action on May 2, 2002. He received and is now serving a sentence of Life in Prison Without Chance of Parole.
Shortly after Case's sentencing, friends of his set up a web site on his behalf in an effort to "prove" Case's innocence. While we feel they should be free to publish whatever they want (within bounds of decency and the law, both of which we believe they have crossed a number of times), we also believe that it is our right to respond to the claims made on that web site. We will not list the address of that website, as we do not believe that we owe any free advertising to Anastasia's killer, and feel that they have gone beyond the bounds of decency in using photos of Case's victim as a form of advertising on their website.
Purpose
We believe that Case's friends' web site presents a number of half-truths and outright fabrications, having cherry-picked from the facts as it suits the cause, misrepresenting evidence that was presented, claiming that they have "nothing to embellish, purposely mistake, or hide", while frequently doing exactly that. They persist in claiming that Case's conviction "was the direct result of only ONE alleged witness' testimony" (their words) yet fail to acknowledge that Case's tacit admission of guilt in a taped conversation, and the transparency of his poor alibi were as important as the eyewitness testimony.
While they rail about "no motive, no DNA evidence, no weapon, no ballistics tests", they ignore that what convicted Byron Case was the
combination of (1) an eyewitness account closely matching the forensic evidence, (2) Case's own tacit admission, (3) the lack of
any believable alibi on Case's part for being the last person to see her alive, (4) strong evidence of Case's animosity toward Anastasia, and
(5) a general lack of believability by the defendant and his key witnesses.
They spend time arguing that this was "a long-unsolved case" that the Sheriff's Department felt "relief" to be able to close, ignoring the facts that (1) the Sheriff's Department did not "close" this case, as the witness came forward to the Prosecutor's Office, NOT the Sheriff's Department, and it was the Prosecutor's independent decision to charge Case, (2) there are MANY murder cases in Jackson County much older than this one that still remain unsolved, and (3) the Sheriff's Department could have "closed" this case as "solved" within days of the murder simply by blaming Case's dead friend, Justin Bruton, had they really been desperate to "solve" it.
It should also be noted that none of those originally responsible for the editorial content of the web site actually attended the trial, and that others currently involved have either never met Case or only did so years after his conviction, and that they have set their opinions of how the trial was handled and created a list of questions they felt pertinent without actually knowing what went on in trial, and to this day still present badly misconstrued arguments; we feel the duty to correct those willful misperceptions. Toward the goal of correcting some of those misperceptions, we have placed transcripts of all testimony and cross-examination during State v. Case.
A Failure to Communicate
This note has been inserted because of recent comments from some of Case's supporters about the testimony of Don Rand, a filling station mechanic who said he saw a girl exit a car near where Case claimed that Anastasia got out of Justin Bruton's car. Case's supporters still claim this is evidence in Case's favor while ignoring its inconsistencies and contradictions. For the benefit of all, we have included a transcript of his testimony and cross-examination, along with further discussions of it here. Those who claim to have studied this website seem to keep missing such things, which tells us that they are doing more wishful thinking than true analysis.
There has also been an effort by those same people to try to blame others for the murder, including Justin Bruton. That issue has been addressed by this website here and here. When Case's supporters believe they have come up with new or unaddressed angles, we believe it is only because they have not done the necessary research.
We do not do this to convince Case's supporters, as they have proven resistant to the facts; we do this because they still make these wrongful arguments, and absent the facts to prove them wrong could fool others into offering financial support to them, based upon half-truths and outright untruths.
Attacks
Web sites maintained by Case apologists continue to make a variety of vicious personal attacks at Anastasia's family, and still accuses us of ad hominem attacks against Anastasia's killer and his supporters, ironically apeing that very accusation from this web site against them. We now refuse contact with Byron Case supporters and apologists out of hand on advice from the the Jackson County Prosecutor's office.
They have also continued their personal attacks against the eyewitness in Case's trial, Kelly Moffett. Here are two quotes in emails from Aaron Vermeulen, one of Case's friends, in 2002:
While we believe that what Mr. Vermeulen was suggesting then amounted to stalking, we also note that none of Case's supporters have ever met any of Kelly Moffett's friends or acquaintances, and that in all the time since Case's conviction, have never produced a single witness to verify their unfounded (and frankly libelous) claims. In short, it is clear Mr. Vermeulen's claims about what he knows about Kelly Moffett are just as false now as they were when he made them. The only "witness" that Case and his friends have ever offered to buttress his claim is Case himself, who has already been shown to be an unreliable witness with a vested interest. In short, they continue to make claims that they cannot even partially sustain. Their claims about Kelly Moffett's personality and motivations form the lion's share of their argument for Case's alleged innocence, but have never yet offered a single scrap of proof, nor can they now.and this:"I am still researching and trying to get in contact with Kelly's old friends and aquaintences."[sic]"As for Kelly Moffett, it would be nice to have another statement from one of Kelly's friends saying what a manipulative lying coke whore she really was/still is."
From the tone of some of the messages attacking us, it is obvious that Case's family and supporters do not understand the difference between the character assaults launched against Anastasia and her family and the factual revelations we have made about her killer. The difference is this: Byron Case has been convicted of murder, and has by that fact forfeited his right to shout "Innocent until proven guilty". He already has been proven guilty. His personality and past activities are now quite relevant to the crime for which he was convicted. The attacks made by his friends against Anastasia, the victim of that murder, who herself has no means to reply or defend herself (especially an attack from someone who once purported to be her friend), is simply unconscionable. We would ask them if they have no shame, but the answer to that question is obvious: they indeed have none. They don't even understand how inappropriate it is that they keep a photograph of Anastasia posted on their website.
Facts
What we report here about the past actions and the personality of Byron Case are true. We report these facts because we believe that the behavior and personality of the individual convicted of such a violent crime as murder are very relevant to the discussion of his guilt. Case can dispute our statements and attempt to refute them if he chooses, because he has the ability to do so. Anastasia does not have that ability -- Byron Case stole it from her when he took her life. She cannot feel pain, discomfort, or sadness, but neither can she feel pleasure, comfort, nor joy, because Byron Case stole all that from her. Byron Case has the rest of his life to make his appeals, his rationalizations, and his excuses; Anastasia has nothing at all. That is the difference.
We have also found it necessary to report facts about certain of Case's friends who have helped him pre- and post-trial, as we believe that it is necessary for all who read the claims and accusations on Case's web site to know from where they originate. It is necessary to know that the individuals who make the claims and accusations are not without stain themselves. Before we published these facts, they were already using their website to maliciously attack some of Anastasia's friends and family, most of whom took no part in the trial. There again is a difference: we share information about individuals directly involved in Case's defense to help counter the one-sided image they wish to portray; they attack uninvolved people merely because they wish to hurt them.
On the killer's web site, the following quote used to appear, that Case's "accusers obviously have much to maintain by shedding Byron
in a bad light." (emphasis ours)
We should make one thing clear: we are not Byron Case's "accusers" (a word that he and his supporters seem to use as a synonym to
"persecutors") ; it was the State of Missouri that accused him of murder. It was a jury of twelve citizens who agreed that the State had
shown evidence of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and convicted him upon that evidence. We are not the accusers; however, we
are the survivors of the victim, and are ourselves victims of his crime.
We also wish to make clear that the only "obvious" thing that we feel we have an need to "maintain" is simply that this criminal should stay
where he belongs. He can appeal through the system as is his right, but we will continue to respond to and rebut the half-truths and falsehoods
that he and his supporters assert on their public website, but cannot assert in court because they cannot meet the burden of proof. And we can
"shed Byron in a bad light" all we want, because what we report of him is true, and is necessary to counteract the untruths of their site.
And finally, we should point out that Case's supporters seem to have a great fiction to maintain themselves, in that they continue to claim
without the slightest supportable proof that Case's ex-girlfriend was "out to get him", and that they continue to avoid addressing the fact that
Case's conviction very much based on his own tacit admission to the murder, recorded during a phone conversation in which he was asked three
times why he killed Anastasia.
It has also been brought to our attention that Case has insisted to many of his followers that he had never been convicted of a crime before
being charged with murder. This is patently untrue, as he was charged with burglary and felony stealing a year before the murder, and he
pled guilty to the latter charge in a plea bargain in 1998. After his conviction and sentencing for murder, an effort was made to reduce
the severity of that charge. It should be pointed out that the victim of the crime was Case's aunt, who had no trouble pressing felony
charges against him in 1996. The post hoc attempt to change that to a misdemeanor charge is merely cosmetic.
We had originally planned have this portion of Anastasia's memorial site up for only a few months in 2003 and then to take it down for space
considerations at the end of the year, but we feel it still serves a purpose and have decided to leave it up permanently, though we still
plan to make periodic changes to it.
Case has already failed in two appeals; his attempt in 2006 to paint his attorney as "incompetent" was the most recent to be overruled, the court finding no merit in his claims. His further appeal (Case WD66780) was rebuffed by
the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District on February 27, 2008,and a further appeal was overruled and denied by the Missouri Supreme Court
on April 29, 2008. A a copy of the Missouri Attorney-General's arguments in response to his appeal may viewed here.
and a copy of the Appellate Court's decision here.
His first appeal (case WD61626)in 2004 was denied by the Missouri Court of Appeals, and the Missouri Supreme Court declined to review the
Appellate Court's decision (case SC86067).
We maintain the information on these pages in the interests of truth and balance, and to rebut many of the most outrageous claims made by
Case's supporters. If you came here from that web site, then you are aware that they are asking for financial or other types of support
from you, and we wish you to understand that there is another side to the story than the one told there, a story they do not wish you to see.Fictions
Permanence
Appeals