Read his own petition. He asks whether they exist, but there are multiple sworn statements that they DID exist. That sworn testimony seems to be missing from the article.
So the pictures were tainted? The guy is incompetent? The pictures were unclear?
If the guy closely examined the photos of the alleged "victim's" face and found no evidence of the alleged "tape marks," which look to be central to this case, the victim (the one doing time for crimes he did not commit) was railroaded.
According to the habeas petition and the judge's denial of same, this part of the article is absolutely false - the wife was cross-examined by the defense attorney.
Oops, missed this later post clarifying what you meant in the prior post. Please disregard MY previous post. 8)