The latest supplemental report discusses, in detail, several new findings, including Brady material contained in a box of evidence (Box 8) from the District Attorney’s Office Case Files. This evidence from Box 8 had previously been withheld by the State and was only made available in February 2023 after Oklahoma’s new Attorney General, Gentner Drummond, took office.

The supplemental report includes additional findings in response to questions raised by the State’s recently appointed Independent Counsel, including an analysis from a leading Oklahoma professor of attorney ethics and professional responsibilities supporting the firm’s findings regarding irregularities in the proceedings against Glossip, including whether:

• An Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals’ Judge should have disclosed and recused himself due to his prior work relationship with the Glossip trial prosecutor (when her conduct was at issue in the last post-conviction petition); and
• A former Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board member should have recused herself from Glossip’s 2014 clemency hearing due to her prior working relationship with the Glossip trial prosecutor.

Specifically, Reed Smith’s Fifth Supplemental Report includes:

• A thorough examination of all recently discovered evidence found in Box 8.
• An accounting of the $1,757 that was in Richard Glossip’s possession when the police arrested him on January 9, 1997, based in part on the new evidence contained in Box 8, which casts significant doubt on the State’s theory of why the money was the fruits of the crime argued at the 2004 trial.
• An analysis of Box 8 in relation to prosecutorial obligations under the U.S. Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court guidance, which require the State and its prosecutors to (1) turn over all exculpatory or impeachment evidence to the defense (in re Brady v. Maryland); and (2) correct the record and false testimony by the State’s star witness in a criminal case (as obligated by Napue v. Illinois).

“The newly discovered information in Box 8 relates to evidence presented at the guilt phase of Richard Glossip’s 2004 retrial,” said David Weiss, one of the Reed Smith partners working on the firm’s independent, third-party investigation. “Unfortunately, the jury did not receive all of the information available at the time, because the State withheld it, contrary to its constitutional obligations to the accused. We are grateful to Attorney General Drummond for authorizing the release of this information so that it can now be properly evaluated.”

“As we have concluded before, we believe that no reasonable juror hearing the complete record would have convicted Richard Glossip of first-degree murder, and this new information further demonstrates that.” Weiss said.

About the Investigation

In 2022, at the request of Oklahoma legislators, a Reed Smith team of 30 lawyers devoted more than 3,700 hours, pro bono, to an independent investigation into Richard Glossip’s case and conviction.

On June 15, 2022, partner Stan Perry announced the team’s initial findings in a 343-page report at a joint press conference that raised significant concerns about Glossip’s case and conviction, as well as several recommendations for improving the death penalty system in Oklahoma.

As of today, the team has released five addendums to its initial report detailing additional findings in their ongoing investigation.

The Reed Smith investigative team’s fifth supplemental report (pdf, March 27, 2023), fourth supplemental report (pdf, Oct. 18, 2022), third supplemental report (pdf, Sept. 20, 2022), second supplemental report (pdf, Aug. 23, 2022), first supplemental report (pdf, Aug. 9, 2022), executive summary (pdf, July 21, 2022) and full report (pdf, June 16, 2022) are available to the public.