Brooks Houck's attorneys get the last word, and they are swinging hard.

"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 weekly newsletter or subscribe to support our mission and access behind-the-scenes content, podcasts, and in-depth stories reserved for paid subscribers.

Brooks Houck's legal team filed a reply brief with the Kentucky Supreme Court this week, and the message is straightforward: the Commonwealth didn't prove its case, and the conviction needs to go.

If you've been following this appeal, here's where we are. In January, Houck's attorneys filed their opening brief laying out their arguments for why his murder conviction should be reversed- challenging everything from the sufficiency of the evidence to the fairness of the jury. In May, the Kentucky Attorney General's office fired back with a 103-page brief arguing the jury got it right, and the conviction should stand.

This most recent filing is called a reply brief- an optional document that gives the appellant, in this case Houck, the last word in writing before the court makes its decision. It's his attorneys' opportunity to respond to the state's arguments, punch holes in the Commonwealth's reasoning, and sharpen the points they've already raised. The Kentucky Supreme Court will now have all three documents as it considers whether to uphold Houck's conviction, reverse it, or order a new trial.

The reply brief clocks in at just 17 pages- lean compared to the AG's sprawling response- but it's pointed.

"Only raised suspicions"

The brief opens by zeroing in on something the Commonwealth admitted at trial: prosecutors acknowledged they couldn't prove who killed Crystal Rogers. Houck's attorneys argue that the state then asked the jury to fill that gap with inference piled on top of inference- and that under Kentucky law, that's not enough to sustain a murder conviction.

"The Commonwealth failed to meet its onerous burden of proving Brooks was guilty of murder and instead only raised suspicions of Brooks's guilt," the brief states. "That is not enough to sustain a conviction."

This goes directly at one of the AG's core arguments- that the circumstantial evidence, taken together, formed a compelling web pointing to Houck. The defense says each piece of that web, examined closely, doesn't hold.

Kentucky AG to court: Brooks Houck killed Crystal Rogers, and the evidence proves it
The state’s top prosecutor filed a 103-page brief urging the Kentucky Supreme Court to uphold Houck’s murder conviction- and didn’t mince words about why. “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
Shay InformedShay McAlister

Taking the evidence apart, piece by piece

The bulk of the brief works through the specific evidence the Commonwealth highlighted in its response and argues that each item was either ambiguous, unreliable, or simply didn't connect to Brooks Houck- according to defense attorneys.