Month: October 2025

UPDATE: USPS reports that “Your item was delivered to the front desk, reception area, or mail room at 10:18 am on October 22, 2025 in LINCOLN, NE 68504”.

DECLARATION OF Kirk J Cottom to Nebraska Counsel For Discipline

I, Kirk J Cottom, being of sound mind and over the age of 18, declare the following under penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746: 

RE: Joseph L. Howard of 1403 Farnam Street, Suite 232 Omaha, Nebraska 68102:

I. Overview

This declaration summarizes the extensive and layered constitutional violations, misconduct, and structural defects that occurred during my prosecution and post-conviction process, including the use of fabricated digital evidence, expert misconduct, prosecutorial collusion, ineffective assistance of multiple court-appointed attorneys, and the obstruction of my right to access my own case materials that contains evidence of all these violations.

II. Fabricated Evidence Introduced by the Prosecution

1. The central piece of evidence against me was a MySQL database table allegedly showing visitor traffic and session data related to an illegal website the government seized on November 15, 2012.

2. This “visitors” table was claimed to be a part of Tinyboard’s system (a PHP Website Program) — one of three servers involved in the case used. In 2013, the government claimed the table had logged user visits with PHP session IDs and in 2015 Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein concurred in their reports.

3. Upon receiving this table in late 2013 discovery, I immediately noticed two technical defects:

• The session_id values changed with every page load, which is inconsistent with PHP’s session_start() behavior.

• The referer and request_uri fields were identical for each entry, a pattern inconsistent with normal web traffic and indicative of fabricated entries.

4. These anomalies strongly indicated that the data was a forgery — In other words, it was clear the data in the visitors table did not occur from any normal website functions.

III. Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein’s Fraudulent Role

5. Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein were retained by Attorney Joseph Gross to examine Tinyboard’s server, where the alleged MySQL table was stored.

6. Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein inspected Pedoboard’s Server instead — a server that never contained the table in question.

7. In their January 2015 report, Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein:

• Claimed the session logic used was standard,
• Did not find any anomalies (because the server they examined had no “visitors” table),
• But inadvertently showed that that session IDs would not behave the way shown in the prosecution’s fabricated table (i.e Code showed the use of session_start).

8. When I confronted them with this error, Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein admitted they had examined the wrong server.

9. Despite this, Joseph Gross used the report for the incorrect server to dismiss my objections and declined to challenge the authenticity of the visitors table, which at this point was being actively hidden by the government & Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein.

10. Upon this disagreement Mr. Gross agreed to file a motion to remove both himself and Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein, citing a total breakdown of communication.

IV. Joseph Howard’s Appointment and Continued Obstruction

11. The court granted the motion and appointed Joseph Howard.

12. I requested that Mr. Howard:

• Terminate Ph.D Podhradsky, Mr. Miller and Mr. Stroschein
• Hire Ph.D Rebecca Mercuri, who was less expensive
• Properly examine Tinyboard’s Server.

13. Joseph Howard refused all requests, insisting on reusing Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein, even though:

• They had been discredited,
• They had examined the wrong server (Pedoboard running on PHPBB),
• They had already – likely – collaborated with the prosecution because the servers were clearly labeled, making their choice to avoid Tinyboard inexplicable.

14. Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein then wrote their June 2015 report, now addressing Tinyboard, but:

• Presented the fabricated MySQL table as legitimate,
• Ignored publicly available website source code that contained no session logic and no visitors table schema for Tinyboard (the software that ran TB2),
• Repeatedly misrepresented technical facts, like claiming actual PHP session id was used when they knew it was not.

V. Ex Parte Collusion Between Keith A. Becker and Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein

15. Through 2025 FOIA litigation, I obtained heavily redacted emails showing that:

• Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein and the prosecutor were communicating directly while they were preparing their second report (that was full of lies that only benefitted the government),
• The prosecutor was influencing the contents of what was supposed to be a defense expert report,
• Joseph Howard was cc’d on these emails, but did not object or disclose the extent of the collusion to me or the court.

16. These heavily redacted emails confirm that their second expert report — the only one submitted to the court on my behalf — was in fact jointly crafted by the prosecution and the experts, with the silent approval from defense counsel.

VI. Post-Conviction Discovery of Fraud and Obstruction

17. After release from prison, I hired Mindfire Technology to independently examine Tinyboard’s software.

18. Mindfire Technology confirmed in a detailed report that:

• No “visitors” table existed in Tinyboard’s Database Schema,
• The website had no code to issue PHP session IDs or log visitor’s activities in any way,
• Concluded that the visitors table was not a part of Tinyboard’s code base.

19. I attempted to share this report with Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein and asked them to explain how they missed this case dispositive fact.

20. Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein refused to engage, and Miller cc’d Joseph Howard in on his email rejecting my request to explain.

21. This further confirms that Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein never worked for the defense — only for the prosecution — and that Joseph Howard continued to shield them even post-conviction, after conclusive evidence of the fabricated “visitors” table emerged.

VII. Joseph Howard’s Continued Stonewalling and Denial of Case File Production

22. On September 23, 2025 the request for my case file arrived by certified mail at Joseph Howard’s front desk. I requested my complete case file, including all communications and work product.

23. As of Noon on October 14, 2025 – Joseph Howard has refused to respond and has not provided the file — a violation of ethical duties and my constitutional right to access the record for post-conviction litigation – I currently have a FOIA case in progress that is producing bombshell after bombshell.

24. Joseph Howard also refused to answer basic questions such as:

• Why he refused to fire Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein,
• Why he didn’t act on the anomalies identified by William Laubenheimer,
• Why he and Steven Slawinski went against my orders to prepare for trial and instead negotiated a plea deal behind my back then coerced me into taking in the evening of July 30, 2015,
• Why he allowed the prosecution and expert to coordinate behind my back.

VIII. Summary of Violations

Based on the above, the following constitutional violations and structural defects occurred:

1. Structural Sixth Amendment error under United States v. Cronic:

• I had no adversarial testing of the prosecution’s key evidence (visitors table).
• My “defense expert” co-authored a report with Keith A. Becker (sometimes quoting him directly while answering my questions in their second report).
• My attorney allowed it, did not object, and blocked me from replacing the experts, knowing that’s why I had Joseph Gross removed.

2. Ineffective assistance of counsel (Strickland v. Washington):

• All attorneys failed to investigate, challenge fabricated evidence, or act on exculpatory facts.
• They obstructed my post-conviction efforts by failing to release exculpatory facts in my file to other attorneys working on my §2255 motion.

3. Denial of expert assistance (Ake v. Oklahoma):

• I was never allowed to acquire an independent expert, even though several were available.
• Joseph Howard forced me to rely on experts that were clearly working with the prosecution.

4. Due process violations:

• Government used fabricated evidence (Mooney v. Holohan).
• Knowingly false expert testimony (Napue v. Illinois).
• Suppression of impeachment evidence (Giglio v. United States).
• Denial of access to courts (Lewis v. Casey), by withholding my file.

5. Actual innocence:

• Mindfire Technology’s forensic report proves the “visitors” table was placed there by the government and a subsequent report (made for an academic conference) by Podhradsky, Miller and Stroschein contains the actual code and proves everything stated above. The Visitors table was fabricated and populated with false data generated by a government coded php script.
• The website’s code shows that Tinyboard never issued sessions or tracked visitors.
• The prosecution’s central evidence (used to obtain TB2 indictments) was entirely fabricated.

IX. Conclusion

This case did not involve a fair trial, an honest expert, or an adversarial defense. I was convicted based on knowingly fabricated digital evidence, court-appointed experts who worked for the prosecution, and attorneys who blocked my ability to expose the truth even after the evidence of my innocence was clear.

I respectfully request the Counsel for Discipline to investigate these claims and order Joseph Howard to provide Kirk Cottom with his entire case file including all e-mails sent and received in this matter from January 2015 to October 2025.

____________________________

Kirk J Cottom