{"id":796448,"date":"2026-05-14T18:59:19","date_gmt":"2026-05-14T18:59:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/796448\/"},"modified":"2026-05-14T18:59:19","modified_gmt":"2026-05-14T18:59:19","slug":"no-trial-date-set-in-brad-simpson-murder-case-amid-sensitive-evidence-review","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/796448\/","title":{"rendered":"No trial date set in Brad Simpson murder case amid sensitive evidence review"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>SAN ANTONIO &#8211; A judge declined to set a trial date Thursday in the murder case against Brad Simpson, citing an ongoing review of sensitive evidence connected to the investigation into the disappearance and presumed death of his wife, Suzanne Simpson.<\/p>\n<p>During a status hearing in the 437th District Court, Judge Joel Perez said no trial date can be scheduled at this time because 81st District Judge Lynn Ellison is still conducting an in-camera review of a large amount of sensitive case material.<\/p>\n<p>RELATED: <a href=\"https:\/\/news4sanantonio.com\/news\/investigations\/brad-simpsons-defense-team-questions-evidence-law-enforcement-in-new-filing#\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">Brad Simpson&#8217;s defense team questions evidence, law enforcement in new filing<\/a><\/p>\n<p>An in-camera review is a private examination of confidential or sensitive evidence by a judge outside the presence of the public and jury. The process is used to determine whether certain materials should be released to prosecutors or the defense.<\/p>\n<p>The defense asked for personnel files for several officers involved in Suzanne Simpson&#8217;s murder investigation, including officers with Olmos Park, Converse PD, BCSO, and Texas DPS.<\/p>\n<p>Brad Simpson\u2019s attorney, Steven Gilmore, appeared disappointed that a trial date was not set but acknowledged the court\u2019s need to complete the review process.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re kind of at the mercy of the court,\u201d Gilmore said after the hearing.<\/p>\n<p>RELATED: <a href=\"https:\/\/news4sanantonio.com\/news\/local\/digital-clues-and-witness-testimony-could-prove-pivotal-in-suzanne-simpsons-murder-case#\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">Digital clues and witness testimony could prove pivotal in Suzanne Simpson&#8217;s murder case<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Brad Simpson is charged with murder in connection with the disappearance of his wife, Suzanne Simpson, who vanished in October 2024. Although her body has never been found, prosecutors moved forward with murder charges, and Simpson has pleaded not guilty.<\/p>\n<p>According to court records and investigative affidavits, authorities said surveillance cameras captured Brad Simpson\u2019s truck after Suzanne Simpson disappeared with trash bags and tarps visible inside the vehicle.<\/p>\n<p>Investigators have also alleged Simpson repeatedly turned his cellphone on and off while driving through rural areas near Boerne and Bandera in the days following her disappearance.<\/p>\n<p>Court documents further state Suzanne Simpson\u2019s DNA was discovered on a motorized saw collected during the investigation.<\/p>\n<p>In recent court filings and hearings, the defense has challenged portions of the investigation, including questioning how law enforcement handled and shared evidence tied to the case.<\/p>\n<p>Prosecutors, meanwhile, have said investigators continue organizing and reviewing a substantial amount of evidence as the case moves through the court system.<\/p>\n<p>The hearing Thursday focused primarily on the status of the evidence review and scheduling matters rather than testimony or arguments related to guilt or innocence.<\/p>\n<p>A new status hearing was scheduled for 60 days from now.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"SAN ANTONIO &#8211; A judge declined to set a trial date Thursday in the murder case against Brad&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":796449,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5133],"tags":[5229,7202,7203,358,3187,67,586,132,5230,68,2969],"class_list":{"0":"post-796448","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-san-antonio","8":"tag-america","9":"tag-san-antonio","10":"tag-sanantonio","11":"tag-texas","12":"tag-tx","13":"tag-united-states","14":"tag-united-states-of-america","15":"tag-unitedstates","16":"tag-unitedstatesofamerica","17":"tag-us","18":"tag-usa"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/796448","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=796448"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/796448\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/796449"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=796448"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=796448"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=796448"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}