As fate would have it, however, Ryan encountered Chuck on Halloween night in 2001 -- the night Kent Heitholt was murdered.

Chuck was leaving a party, and Ryan, who was headed to a Columbia nightclub called ",By George,", offered Chuck a ride. They ultimately ended up at the nightclub together.

They were 17 and underage, but were allowed inside.

They arrived at ",By George", around 11:30 p.m. and departed at approximately 1:15 a.m. The bar closed its doors at 1:30 a.m. as stipulated by state law and city ordinance. This is crucial to Ryan's defense.

During the trial, the prosecutor stated that the bar likely stayed open past the 1:30 closing time and implied in the absence of ANY evidence that it was open after 1:30 a.m. and later.

If that were indeed the case, "By George" would have been cited for violations of the city and state law. (Police Report # 268)

During the trial, the prosecutor was able to plant in the minds of the jury the impression that the bar had been open after 1:30 a.m., and even indicated that this was a common occurrence.

The prosecutor may have obtained the records from the Missouri Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control. These records show that this club had never received a summons for being open after 1:30a.m. at any time in its 10 year history.

Unfortunately Ryan's attorney never obtained these records. If he had had the records he could have ended any speculation the jury might have had as well as the innuendoes the prosecutor made about it being a common occurrence for the bar to be open after 1:30am.

We have a suspicion that the prosecutor knew or should have known that what he was saying was untrue and therefore should never have made these statement and innuendoes to the jury without having evidence or witnesses. For him to do so seems improper.

It is interesting to note that 10 people including patrons and employees have given sworn statements saying the bar was closed at 1:30 a.m. that morning. Some of these statements were given during the trial and others have been taken since the trial.

The prosecutor has never produced a single witness that could testify that the bar was open after 1:30 a.m.

Not one!

To the contrary, Ryan's attorneys found two witnesses - a bartender and patron - who were at the club on the night of October 31, 2001. These witnesses told the judge (while the jury was out of the court room) that months before the trial they had been individually questioned by two different investigators from the prosecutor's office. They both said that they had told the investigators that the bar had closed at 1:30 a.m. on Nov. 1, 2001.

But the prosecution failed to make a report of these witness contacts and to document their statements. It also failed to report this information to the defense.

The statements given by the bartender and patron are considered exculpatory evidence which, by law, the prosecution must share with the defense. These actions by the prosecutor in this case represent a breach of ethics and the law.

The judge in Ryan's trial acknowledged the exculpatory violations.

Although the prosecutor claimed that he was not aware of the violation, the judge said it was the prosecutor's responsibility to know the law.

The prosecutor was responsible to know what his investigators have investigated.

The two witnesses would be permitted to testify in front of the jury.

Unfortunately, the jury was never told of these serious violations by the prosecution.

This information can be verified through the court transcripts. Page ... 1,595 

When the judge asked the two investigators why they had not produced these reports, one said he forgot and the other conveniently could not remember, even though the two witnesses identified the investigators in the courtroom in front of the judge.

Since the trial we have found 8 other witnesses that have provided sworn statements that the bar was closed at 1:30 a.m.

The most important of these is the bouncer/doorman.

In Erickson's testimony during the trial, he stated that he saw the same bouncer that had let them in the first time, standing at the front door of the club as they walked by on the way to Ryan's car to drop off items and return to the club the second time.

Erickson testified that it was this same bouncer who let them in the club the second time. This would have been after 2:30 a.m. 911 had been called at 2:26 a.m.

We have located the bouncer who has provided us with a sworn affidavit stating that in his two years of employment with By George, he was never present at the club after 2:15 a.m.

Last drinks were announced at 1:00 a.m. and the lights came on. The bar closed at 1:30 a.m. which is critical because Ryan says that he walked out of By George around 1:15 a.m.

He called his sister from the parking lot at 1:18 a.m. (which has been verified through cell phone records), socialized a few minutes and then drove Erickson home. That drive would have taken approximately 10 minutes.

After dropping Chuck off, Ryan then drove to his parents' home, which would have taken another four minutes.

Once he arrived home, he began calling friends on his cell phone. These calls, which have been verified by cell phone records, started at 1:41 a.m. and continued until his last call made at 2:09 a.m.

Finding no one to talk to he went to bed. A record of the times that calls were made or received from Ryan's cell phone, further confirms the story Ryan tells of what happened that night. (Ryan's Sprint cell phone records)

Ryan's version of the sequence of events makes sense, is rational and logical and fits with the facts that have been documented about this case.

Chuck Erickson, however, has a very different account of what happened when they left the bar that night.

He says that he and Ryan had run out of money (this was never established by the prosecution) and decided to rob someone so that they could buy more drinks at the bar - which we now know had already closed.

Ryan and Chuck knew over 10 other kids who were also at the club that night.

They could have borrowed money from anyone of them rather than walk downtown within a couple blocks of the police station and rob a 6 foot 3 inch, 315 pound, X-college football player. Chuck's story just doesn't add up.

The prosecutor's motive seems weak ... even desperate. Prior to this, these boys had never been suspected of, or charged with any sort of crime related to violence or stealing. !!!!!!!!!!!!

Of course if you are only 17 and just 17 by 12 days, one really hasn't had much of an opportunity to have a rap sheet. Except for a speeding ticket, Ryan had never been in court.