“Simpson v. Walters in the U.S. Supreme Court.” Today is March 16, 2026. The following case was just recently added to the docket of the United States Supreme Court. Thomas Bartholomew Simpson, the Joseph Walters director Virginia Department of Corrections, Case Number 25-6912. This case, when decided, will have far reaching impact and implications. The issue and the main question that circuit courts are in conflict with, in which the Supreme Court has not yet addressed, is this: Does it require expert testimony or lay witness testimony to set the foundation for electronic communications? Specifically, text messages in this case.
This case is of first impression, because in United States v. Chavez Lopez in the Fourth Circuit 2019, the court stated, “The district court did not plainly err by admitting the text messages and call logs without expert testimony about the data extraction process, because no Fourth Circuit or U.S. Supreme Court precedent dictated that such testimony was necessary.” (ID at 435) With that question on the table, consider some of the facts. There was no phone or laptop seized in the case. The accused was sitting in a jail cell when he was presented a stack of papers alleged to be text messages sent to a supposed victim, yet there are no identifiable phone numbers and no dates on which the alleged messages were sent. In other words, there was exactly zero evidence upon which to base a case and prosecute it. It is worth pointing out that this misconduct occurred in Virginia, and that this kind of misconduct extends through all levels of the Virginia judiciary.
There is a serious public and private interest in the outcome of this case, and the decision will affect all parts of our social strata. To further implicate Virginia for example, the Commonwealth attorney who prosecuted the case did so based on a “witness” who said that unidentified texts on papers, “sound like the accused.” In legal terms, this is known as hearsay and supposition, in lay terms, not evidence of any kind. This is the Virginia model of jurisprudence, and it has become a very serious problem, one that is now basically a national threat.
If the U.S. Supreme Court holds with Virginia, the precedent will create a wildfire spread of baseless convictions on no evidence and the least tangible of justifications. If someone can be shown words on a page completely unidentified and with no traceable attachments to phone or messaging accounts and claim it sounds like so and so a prosecutor can gain a conviction on such hearsay with no actual evidence. We will see bad problems with our system become immeasurably worse. This is in direct conflict with, is in all way contrary to, any equitable system of jurisprudence, and even more so, with the ideals of the United States. 250 years of the experiment called liberty, and how far we have strayed.
This is a daily occurrence in Virginia, with a 20% rate of wrongful convictions, according to a Pew survey, and the ninth highest rate of convictions in the U.S. Virginia, whose entire population of 8.7 million is about equal with New York City. This level of prosecutorial misconduct is commonplace in the Commonwealth. Worse still, Virginia’s politicians have been duly informed, and they are aware of Virginia’s role as a national pariah, yet they choose to do nothing. Discouraging, is a word, but so is despotism. We must, all of us, hope that the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirms a simple mandate of American jurisprudence that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, is an absolute and unequivocal requirement for prosecution, and nothing less.
We can then hope that following that logical ruling in favor of Mr. Simpson, the U.S. Supreme Court may be persuaded to order some sort of intensive investigation into Virginia’s courts and Commonwealth attorneys. The danger has become very real. Lives are already being destroyed, and have been for decades. My name is David Annarelli, contributing writer to prisonjournalism project.org, davidannarelli.wordpress.com, you can find me on Instagram, david_annarelli, numerous other sites. Thank you very much.
These commentaries are recorded by Prison Radio.
