Prosecutors urge judge to deny new trial motions in Crystal Rogers case
– 7 min read
Prosecutors have filed comprehensive responses urging Nelson Circuit Judge Charles Simms to deny motions for new trials for both Brooks Houck and Joseph Lawson.
"I'm Shay McAlister, and this is Shay Informed: an independent, ad-free platform dedicated to honest journalism with compassion and clarity.
Are you new here? Sign up for the free newsletter or subscribe to support our mission.
Crystal Rogers disappeared on July 3, 2015, after leaving her home with Brooks Houck for what she described to friends as a "kid-free date." Rogers, a mother who was described as inseparable from her children, has never been seen or heard from since that evening. Her vehicle was found abandoned on the Bluegrass Parkway with her purse, keys, and phone inside.
The Commonwealth's case against Houck relied heavily on circumstantial evidence, as Rogers' body was never found. Now, prosecutors are arguing even still the evidence clearly establishes both her death and Houck's criminal responsibility.
New court documents filed Monday, just days ahead of his final sentencing, lay out the commonwealth's case against both Brooks Houck and Joseph Lawson.
Brooks Houck sentencing: here’s how I’m covering it (and what you’ll get)
Brooks Houck and Joseph Lawson are set to be sentenced to prison time for their role in the death of Crystal Rogers on Wednesday afternoon. I’ll be in the courtroom and providing exclusive coverage afterwards. “I’m Shay McAlister, and this is Shay Informed: an independent, ad-free platform dedicated to honest
Shay McAlister
Key evidence against Houck
Inconsistent statements and behavior
The court document details numerous inconsistencies in Houck's statements to law enforcement:
- False alibi claims: Houck provided a detailed written statement about his whereabouts between 9:29 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on July 3, which was later proven false through Google location mapping and expert testimony
- Contradictory accounts: He initially claimed Rogers suggested the farm visit, but witnesses testified Rogers told them it was a "surprise date" planned by Houck
- Weather discrepancies: Despite heavy rain that night (confirmed by surveillance video), Houck claimed they took long walks and spent over four hours outside at the farm
Digital evidence
Critical phone and location data supported the prosecution's case:
- Rogers' phone died at 9:23 p.m. on July 3 while someone was playing a game, then was manually powered off hours later after being re-charged
- The phone remained off until July 6, when police charged it after recovering it from Rogers' vehicle
- Cell phone tower data contradicted Houck's claims about his movements and whereabouts
Suspicious conduct after disappearance
The Commonwealth highlighted Houck's behavior following Rogers' disappearance:
- Despite Rogers' family calling and texting repeatedly about her whereabouts, Houck went about his normal weekend activities, and ignored her family's calls
- He attended a July 4th family gathering and never reported Rogers missing
- When questioned by others, he provided different explanations for Rogers' absence
- He purchased a digital recorder after an interview with Detective Snow and used it to record subsequent law enforcement interactions
Connection to co-defendants
The case also involved evidence of coordination with others:
- Phone records showed Steve Lawson called Brooks Houck around midnight, on the night Rogers' vehicle was spotted on the Bluegrass Parkway
- Lawson's phone data indicated he traveled toward the location where Rogers' vehicle was found
- After July 8, the day of Houck's police interview, all communication between Houck and Lawson ceased entirely
- Evidence suggested the involvement of other family members, including Rosemary Houck and Nick Houck, in covering up the crime
Lawson's specific defense arguments
Joseph Lawson's post-trial motion raises several key arguments challenging his conviction. His primary contention focuses on the joint trial, arguing that Brooks Houck's statements to law enforcement violated his confrontation clause rights and that the "disparate" amount of pretrial publicity against Houck denied him a fair trial.
However, prosecutors counter that the joint defense agreement was Lawson's strategic choice. They note that Houck's statements actually benefited Lawson's defense by providing an alternative explanation for the events that did not implicate Lawson. The Commonwealth argues that if Lawson wanted to distance himself from Houck, he was free to pursue a separate defense strategy or call Houck as a witness.
Lawson also challenged the court's handling of jury selection, specifically claiming the court improperly denied his motion to strike jurors with knowledge of Steve Lawson's prior conviction. However, prosecutors point out that Lawson failed to follow proper procedures under Collins v. Commonwealth, which requires strict compliance with six specific steps to preserve such errors for appeal.
The Commonwealth notes that Lawson failed to identify which specific jurors should have been struck or provide reasoning for why their answers warranted removal. Additionally, the motion lacks compliance with procedural requirements for challenging venue and jury instructions.
Lawson also took issue with several evidentiary rulings during trial, including:
- The admission of Heather Snellen's testimony about overhearing conversations between Joseph and Steve Lawson regarding moving Crystal Rogers' body
- Claims that he was prevented from introducing evidence of Steve Lawson's prior inconsistent statements
- Challenges to cell phone location evidence and expert testimony about his movements
Prosecutors respond that the evidence was properly admitted and that Houck's expert witness, Dr. Lauf, was not credible, admitting during testimony that his analysis was flawed and that he had not reviewed all relevant data points.
Motion for directed verdict
Houck's defense argued he was entitled to a directed verdict after the prosecution rested its case, claiming the Commonwealth failed to prove Rogers' death or that it resulted from criminal activity. The court rejected this argument, citing legal precedent that both death and criminal agency can be established through circumstantial evidence.
The court noted the case was similar to Phillips v. Commonwealth, where a defendant's confession alone was insufficient to prove murder without a body, but circumstantial evidence including the victim's unexplained disappearance and the defendant's inconsistent statements established the corpus delicti.
Venue challenge
Houck's attorneys also challenged the venue, arguing the Commonwealth failed to prove the crime occurred in Nelson County. The court found this argument without merit, noting that Rogers never returned from the Houck family farm in Nelson County, and evidence showed suspicious activity in the early morning hours of July 4 at Thompson Hill, also located in Nelson County.
Final sentencing set for Wednesday
The Nelson Circuit Court will hear arguments on the post-trial motions during a sentencing hearing scheduled for Wednesday. The judge will rule on whether to grant new trials or judgments notwithstanding the verdicts for either defendant.
Here's what I'm planning
I'm putting together several different pieces of coverage on Wednesday because this case deserves it. And you deserve options for how you want to follow along.
The Basic Facts: What happened, what was said, and details on the final sentences. The essential information you need to know. This piece will be free and completely available to everyone.
Behind-the-scenes photo gallery: I'll be taking photos all day long- from outside the courthouse, the media setup, the atmosphere, and inside the courtroom. Some pictures will be available to free members, and the full gallery will be available to paid subscribers.
The deep dive analysis: This is the piece I'm most excited about: "What Comes Next." This isn't just a recap; it's an analysis of what this sentence means, what appeals might look like, what the families said, and what the investigators involved behind the scenes believe could be coming down the pipeline. This story will be available to paid subscribers.
Live Q&A: Here's where it gets interesting. The nightly live streams during the trial were a great way to tell you about what happened that day and where we go from here. I'm bringing that back for sentencing, but it's going to look a little different.
About that live Q&A
The live Q&A will be Wednesday at 8 pm EST, and exclusively for paid subscribers. If you're a paid subscriber, you'll get the link Wednesday morning to join.
Here's my thinking: with 170,000 of you following along on social media, a public live stream is chaos. There's no way for me to follow the comments/questions. This time, I want to actually be able to have real conversations, answer your specific questions, and dive into the details that matter to you.
I genuinely love these live sessions. They're when I learn what you're really thinking, what details matter to you that I might have missed, and where we can process these big moments together. It's the closest thing to being in the room together, figuring out what it all means.
If you're a free subscriber, you'll get the full recording the next day. Every question, every answer, nothing cut out. But if you want to be in the room (so to speak), asking questions as we process this together in real time, that's what paid subscriptions are for.
Why I'm doing it this way
I'll be straight with you- this is my job. But more than that, this case has consumed years of my life, and I know it's consumed yours, too. The people who've chosen to financially support this work deserve something special. They deserve to be first in line for the conversation we're all going to want to have Wednesday night.
Free subscribers still get:
- The essential facts and developments
- A partial photo gallery showing what the day was like
- The Q&A recording (a day later)
Paid subscribers get all of that, plus:
- The comprehensive "What Comes Next" analysis
- Live access to ask questions and immediate answers
- The best photos and behind-the-scenes moments I captured, with full access to my behind-the-scenes gallery
Either way, I'm glad you're here for this final chapter. Wednesday's going to be intense, emotional, and probably pretty draining for the family that has waited more than a decade to see justice served in Crystal's case. I will be covering the day like I have every other step of this case... with compassion, integrity and honesty. They deserve that, and so do you!
