Glenn Allen Smith has been sitting in a county jail in Nevada, Iowa, for approximately four years while his freedom hangs in the balance. In 2008 he was accused of the murder a homeless man by the name of Daniel McGonigle. While the state was trying to get a conviction of first-degree murder, the jury in April 2009 found him guilty of second-degree murder. However, according to court documents, Judge William Pattison made the following statement: “The guilty verdict has to be set aside, specifically I concluded that the guilty verdict on the charge of Second Degree Murder was contrary to the evidence’s weight and that justice required a new trial on that charge for Mr. Smith.” (Judge Pattison, pg 1, Ruling on Post-Trial Motion)

The records further state there is very little disparity between the state’s version of the facts and those adduced by Smith. Pattison also stated: ”Truth be told, I gave serious consideration to dismissing the first and second degree charges at the conclusion of the state’s case. There was little, if any, evidence supporting the concept of ‘premeditation,’ and the evidentiary record on the ‘malice aforethought’ element was almost as thin.” (Pattison, pg 2, Ruling on Post-Trial Motion)

Pattison also said his post-trial evidentiary review corroborated, in spades, his initial impression that the verdict was contrary to the evidence’s weight. While Holmes, through the use of the media, has attempted to have the public believe Smith is simply an out of control, violent person who roams the roads, statements in court records diminish his opinions.

In May 2008, when Smith first met Fowler, he asked to stay at his camp. Fowler declined the request, and Smith politely left the area. Smith spent the night at a golf course, the groundskeeper testified that when he found Smith, he awoke him and told them he was on private property and could not sleep there and that Smith was polite, apologetic and promptly vacated the area. Police also said Smith presented no problem and was cooperative and answered all questions posed to him. At no time during any of these situations did Smith present a problem, much less rant in any manner whatsoever.

It was established McGongile was a career and chronic drinker who became belligerent and confrontational. Smith’s version of the events is the same now as it was when the investigating officers spoke to him initially. The state’s own evidence in the form of Fowler’s testimony established “beyond any doubt” McGonigle, not Smith, was the instigator of and provocateur in the fight that resulted in McGongile being stabbed. Smith, upon being able to break free from McGonigle, also instructed Fowler to call an ambulance for McGongile. The judge said he was satisfied that Smith’s testimony on this aspect is more credible. The state’s own medical examiner testified McGonigle might likely have survived the stab wounds had he not had the pheochromocytoma (a problem with the adrenal glands).

Most of the state’s case against Smith was constructed largely on theories, speculation and postulates. In November 2010, in the Court of Appeals of Iowa, the district court expressly found Smith to be credible. Because the district court found the weight of the evidence rebutted the presumption of malice, the state had the burden to prove malice aforethought by credible evidence. The district court found the weight of the evidence failed to support the jury’s finding of “malice aforethought.” The court affirmed the decision the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence. (The Court of Appeals of Iowa, November 24, 2010). Since the appellant court’s decision, Smith’s own attorney has failed in his representation of his client. He has broken attorney client privilege by making known to the press comments that were made to him by Smith that should have been held in confidence. Not only is Smith’s right to freedom of religion being stepped on, he is in my opinion being persecuted for his religious beliefs and his trial is being held up because his own attorney has sought an evaluation to prove he is competent to stand trial. All of this has taken place based on two factors: Smith writes numerical biblical charts and made the statement, ”God will be on my jury.”

Previous court documents have shown Smith to have been cooperative in many instances as well as being found credible, and his competency was never previously questioned. While a recent article has stated Holmes wants to seal the evaluation information because he is concerned that disclosing it could jeopardize future proceeding if it is public knowledge, Smith would like the following to be known, which is stated in records from the Medical and Classification Center. “Smith participates in the unit activities; his participation is appropriate and with no behavior problems. He does not exhibit psychotic, suicidal nor homicidal symptoms. While he is preoccupied with his religious beliefs and has no problem voicing his beliefs, this has not been a problem on the units or with his day to day functioning. He refuses medication and based on his behavior we have no reason to administer medication.” (Medical services director, Medical and Classification center, May 2012).

This entire case is a travesty of justice. It has been clearly shown in court documents this was indeed a case of self-defense. Smith was not the attacker, did not provoke and tried to deescalate the situation and had no choice but to defend himself from death after being attacked a second time. As I previously stated, Smith is not getting adequate counsel, not being given a fair and speedy trial, his First Amendment rights are being violated, and his life and freedom are hanging in the balance. I also feel that without a change of veneer or change of venue, he will never receive a fair trial due to all the negative publicity. It is time that justice is served in this case and for Glenn Allen Smith to be given his life back.