Brad Simpson, a 53-year-old Texas man, stands accused of murdering his wife, Suzanne Simpson, a realtor who vanished in early October. A Bexar County grand jury indicted Simpson on a slew of charges, including murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, tampering with a corpse, tampering with physical evidence, and possession of a prohibited weapon. The indictment alleges that Simpson intentionally caused Suzanne’s death on or around October 6th. While her body remains unrecovered, the discovery of Suzanne’s DNA on a reciprocating saw, a tool capable of dismembering a body, which Simpson allegedly attempted to conceal, forms a crucial piece of the prosecution’s case. This discovery, coupled with witness testimony and Simpson’s suspicious behavior following Suzanne’s disappearance, paints a grim picture.
The investigation into Suzanne’s disappearance began shortly after an alleged altercation between the couple outside their Olmos Park home. A neighbor witnessed the argument and later reported hearing screams coming from a nearby wooded area. Further adding to the suspicion, the couple’s five-year-old child informed a school counselor that Simpson had physically assaulted Suzanne inside their home on the evening of her disappearance. The child also claimed Simpson had deactivated Suzanne’s phone amidst their fight. These accounts, combined with the absence of any sign of life from Suzanne since the alleged assault, as confirmed by cellphone records, financial transactions, and testimonies from family, friends, and colleagues, solidified the authorities’ suspicion of foul play.
Following Suzanne’s disappearance, Simpson exhibited a series of questionable actions that further fueled investigators’ suspicions. He deactivated his phone, drove with suspicious items in his truck bed, visited a dump site, and meticulously cleaned his truck at a car wash. These actions, captured on video and tracked through GPS data, provide circumstantial evidence that strengthens the prosecution’s case. While the exact nature of the “prohibited weapon” remains undisclosed in the indictment, the cumulative weight of the evidence points toward a premeditated crime and subsequent attempts to cover up the evidence.
The indictment details the aggravated assault charge, accusing Simpson of using a deadly weapon, as well as another unidentified object, “capable of causing death and seriously bodily injury.” This suggests a brutal attack and further implicates Simpson in Suzanne’s death. The indictment also reveals that Simpson is accused of tampering with a human corpse on October 7th, the day after Suzanne’s disappearance, further suggesting an attempt to conceal evidence and obstruct the investigation. This charge underlines the gravity of the situation and adds to the mounting evidence against Simpson.
Simpson’s defense attorney, Steven Gilmore, filed a motion to quash the indictments, arguing that the language used was vague and ambiguous, failing to clearly articulate the charges against his client. This legal maneuver is a common tactic employed by defense attorneys to challenge the validity of indictments. However, legal experts suggest that the circumstantial evidence, including witness testimony, Simpson’s suspicious activities, and the discovery of Suzanne’s DNA on the reciprocating saw, form a strong foundation for the prosecution’s case.
The case against Brad Simpson continues to unfold, with his next court appearance scheduled for December 19th. He remains in Bexar County Jail, awaiting the legal proceedings. The search for Suzanne Simpson’s remains continues, and the community mourns the loss of a mother, wife, and respected member of the real estate community. The prosecution, driven by the pursuit of justice for Suzanne, will strive to present a compelling case based on the available evidence, while the defense will likely challenge the strength and admissibility of that evidence. The outcome of this case remains uncertain, leaving the family and community in a state of anxious anticipation.
