Update 11/25/2025:  After no response or corrections from KDFA News 10, Edward has filed a $15M Defamation Lawsuit against them.
Click here for the Verified Complaint and Exhibits.

Update 11/20/2025:  *NEW* supplement to New Trial Petition:  We discovered three requests (not one) to the State over the course of 4 years to turn over all evidence. More helpful insight from seasoned post-conviction attorneys who reviewed the court records: We discovered a major issue in the State’s Discovery Notice. This is significant for two reasons:
        1.   
On 11/25/2020, the State acknowledges received a Discovery 39.14 request from defense. 
        2.  On 9/3/2022, defense sent the State a second Discovery 39.14 request. 
        3.  On 3/23/2023, the third Discovery 39.14 request was made. 

        This means the State was placed on formal 39.14 notice as early as 2020, nearly four years before trial. 

     Under the Michael Morton Act, even a generic 39.14 request requires the State to disclose all digital evidence, all impeachment material, all witness statements, all officer notes, and all records in which the complaining witness appears. Yet the case file contains no First or Second 39.14 Motion, only trial counsel’s motion dated 3/23/2024. The State therefore had multiple opportunities—at least two in 2020—to provide the evidence required by law but instead withheld digital materials from 2020 until six days before trial in what some call "ambush" disclosure. That timeline, combined with the missing discovery motions, is extremely telling. We are preparing to add this as a supplemental issue as well. 


Update 11/19/2025: *NEW* supplement to New Trial Petition
based on helpful advice from a TX defense attorney who prefers to remain anonymous. This attorney identified yet another instance of trial-counsel error during sentencing. After reviewing the sentencing transcript, he asked why Edward’s wife and mother appeared to agree with the prosecutor’s statement that Edward’s good deeds “don’t justify ruining Becca’s life.” He was stunned by their explanation: the defense attorney had instructed them to lie and agree with the prosecutor, warning that if they did not, the jury would become angry and give Edward the maximum 10-year sentence. In reality, both women believed the verdict was wrong and that Edward had not ruined Becca’s life. But they were pressured—by Edward’s own lawyer—into giving false testimony out of fear that the jury would retaliate against Edward for seeming not to “accept” the verdict.  Here is an excerpt from the full Supplement:
       
"Counsel induced witnesses to give testimony they did not believe was true, violating ethical and constitutional standards (Nix v. Whiteside; ABA Standards 4-3.3; 4-1.2).
        Counsel’s instructions forced defense witnesses to affirm the prosecution’s theory that Applicant “destroyed” the complainant’s life — a direct contradiction of the defense theory and Applicant’s actual innocence claim. Mitigation was materially compromised. Although counsel allowed testimony about sobriety and positive life changes, he destroyed the most important mitigation category: the moral culpability assessment. Forced agreement with the State’s central moral claim nullified the mitigating effect of the rest of the testimony. The jury heard the complainant’s “destroyed her life” narrative echoed by the defense’s own witnesses, a devastating blow that no reasonable mitigation strategy could justify.
       Counsel’s rationale — that witnesses must “support the verdict” — is wrong as a matter of law. Sentencing witnesses are not required to validate the jury’s belief about guilt. They may testify honestly about: their belief in the defendant’s character, their doubts about the complainant’s credibility, and their view of what sentence is deserved. Counsel’s advice silenced truthful testimony, misdirected mitigation, and effectively reinforced the prosecution’s aggravating evidence, contributing to the imposition of prison time." 
 

Update 11/18/2025: 
Photos of Edward and family added on Photos tab

Update 11/14/2025: More evidence added supporting the credibility issues of Becca and her roommate on the Evidence tab that warrant a new trial.

Update 11/12/2025: Edward's wife asked KDFA for correction or retraction on the false and misleading statements made by KDFA. The requested evidence of falsity, which she then provided. A further response from KDFA is pending.

Update 11/10/2025: 
Article and news story seen on Channel 10 Amarillo KDFA -- the story contained false and misleading information. He did NOT "avoid many attempts by law enforcement" to serve the arrest warrant. He was never contacted or approached by law enforcement prior to his voluntary surrender to the Ocean County Sheriff’s Office on July 24, 2025, and there is no record of such.  He did NOT refuse to serve his prison sentence, he voluntarily surrendered when the appellate mandate was issued, fully complying with Texas law. He did not "get caught"...he was always at home in New Jersey, where the Amarillo judge allowed him to be on bond, and he reported to his local county sheriff's office on behalf of Texas when the Texas mandate was issued to begin his sentence.  We requested a correction of the reporter's inaccuracies (see Defamation Exhibits link)

Update 11/8/2025:  After 3 months in Ocean County, Edward's extradition hearing took place on October 22, 2025. Edward had already decided to waive extradition and continue the fight in Texas. After Edward signed the waiver for extradition, he was transported on October 31, 2025. Texas arrived 30 minutes before his first visit with his wife, Kelly. Although they weren't able to see each other, they believe every day that passes is one step closer to Edward's freedom, so it keeps them grounded. The Habeas Corpus has been filed in Potter County District Court, pending Judge Dee Johnson's review in December. If she finds that his ineffective assistance of counsel deprived him of a fair trial, she recommends a new one be granted. She sends that to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, and they almost always follow the trial court judge's recommendation. Check back for updates on that; the judge will ask Edward's trial counsel for an affidavit answering the claims against him.

We are thrilled with the outpouring of support. Potter County hears you, and we believe they will do the right thing because Amarillo is filled with kind, generous people who do the right thing every day. 

Many of you have asked what Edward's extradition trip was like. One day in jail is traumatizing; by 90 days, you almost forget what the sky looks like. Over those 3 months, through prayer and meditation, he came out of his PTSD about Texas and realized that Texas would see the truth in his Habeas Corpus; he didn't have to fear it. The 5-day trip was grueling, but God was with him and he found gratitude in the small things, like being able to see the expansive sky. 

Currently, he is in Potter County jail waiting for the Habeas Corpus to be reviewed for the granting of a new trial. He is okay and his faith is getting him through. The most important thing to do now is to share this website with the Potter County community so they can learn how fundamentally unfair the entire process was for Edward and that he deserves a new trial. It is not the judge's fault; it was a jury trial. It's not the jury's fault; they could only go with what was presented. They didn't know the truth because it was never presented to them. Our God-given right, protected by our Constitution, is the right to effective counsel, which he did not have. The Habeas Corpus outlines it explicitly!

***We also found a biomechanical (human body) expert in causation of injury who said the photo does not match the description of assault, and he is writing an affidavit to add to the Habeas Corpus. That has been added to the Evidence tab. That first photo shows she was not punched close-up multiple times in rapid succession, over and over in the face and eyes; this is the conclusion from the expert. All Edward's counsel had to do was investigate and build a defense based on obvious credibility issues. This expert and his testimony took one week to obtain.**