Secret court evidence revealed in Faria murder case

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

TROY, MO (KTVI)-- You`re about to hear evidence kept from a jury in a high profile murder case.  Jurors convicted Russell Faria in the stabbing death of his wife, Betsy.

Arguably, some of the most intriguing facts in this Troy, Missouri case, were suppressed by the Judge.  This is evidence that came out in open court, during the murder trial of Russell Faria, but after the Judge ordered jurors to take recess. The evidence involves victim Betsy Faria`s friend, who may have been the last person to see Betsy alive.

We`re talking about Pam Hupp who testified that she drove Betsy home at around seven the night of the murder.  She admitted staying about 20 minutes.

According to testimony, Betsy failed to pick up important phone calls that she was expecting from her daughter at 7:21, 7:26 and 7:30.

Court records indicate Hupp`s cell phone was in the area during those times, but the jury did not hear that Hupp told police she was home at 7:27 p.m.  On a map, produced by a defense forensic expert, you can see a ping from Hupp`s cell phone at 7:27.  It's near the Faria home and far away from her O'Fallon home. Incourt, we also heard Hupp first told police, and Betsy`s mother, that she did not go into Betsy`s home when she dropped her off. However, she changed her story on the stand, admitting she did enter and stayed for awhile.

According to court testimony - days before the murder - Betsy`s life insurance was changed into Pam Hupp`s name.  According to testimony, Hupp currently controls those proceeds.

Russ Faria`s defense attorney, Joel Schwartz uncovered this and presented it duringtrial.  The Judge ordered the jury to leave during the testimony.  Schwartz commented, "if I was a juror, I'd be extremely offended."  He continued, "We were able to show where this particular person was, who stated she had already gotten homeand the Judge would not allow us to get into that." Chris Hayes asked,"And you think the jury had every right." Schwartz answered, "Absolutely the jury had every right.  That person testified."

Lincoln County Prosecutor Leah Askey believes the secret evidence is not relevant.  Hayes asked Askey, "Are the jurors going to be surprised and upset when they find out they didn't hear certain things?" Askey answered, "No, I don't believe so. Part of our process, part of our constitution gives us different rightsand there's protocol that goes into every case that's tried and so things that are prejudicial to either one side or the other, you know the Judge has to weigh those things."

Defense attorney Schwartz is already working on an appeal. We`ll keep following the evidence.  Tweet your thoughts through #FariaTrial #FoxFiles and/or @ChrisHayesTV

Related Stories:

Jury finds man guilty of stabbing wife 55 times

Inside murder trial of man accused of stabbing wife 55 times


  • Finally!

    Yesss! Finally! This is needed to know! Now let’s get this info out to help get her questioned and held and get Russ out!

  • Barbara

    A friend of mine is one of those people implicated as “LIARS” because they are Russ’s alibi. His name is being slandered and drug through the mud because of this trial and now to find out THIS information!?!? Seems to me that a great injustice has been done here to this man who was convicted and his friends. The police need to look further into this woman.

    • Kim

      This is only one of the many things the prosecution would not allow the jury to hear. Everyone else in the courtroom could, just not the jury. How could she feel this was not relevant? Probably for the same reason she thought the jury should not be able to hear that Betsy’s life insurance beneficiary had been changed to only Pam (from Russ and her daughters) the Friday before her death. This took place at the Winghaven Library with the librarian as the notary and witness. Really??? She probably did not want it heard because it cast doubt on another person and cast doubt that Russ was guilty. Another person testified to everyone in the court room BUT AGAIN NOT the jury. She testified she had just recently had a conversation with Betsy. Betsy told her she had meeting coming up with Pam that she did not want to go to. In addition to that they had a deep discussion about life and death and Betsy told this person she and Russ were at peace with where they were and if she died before Russ, he and the girls would be taken care of and if he died before her, she and the girls would be taken care of. Do I believe her? Absolutely! I went to lunch and chemo with Betsy exactly one week before her murder and with the exception of the meeting with Pam, she told me the exact same things about the insurance and coverage. In addition to that Betsy and I looked at hotels in Vegas on line. My husband and I were planning a trip for our 25th wedding anniversary. Betsy and Russ and another couple who we are good friends with, were all going to go. We were trying to find a hotel or one of Betsy’s time shares where we could all stay. Using Ms Askey’s “reasonable inference” (see this phrase later in my post)… Why make plans for a trip in 4 months if you are planning on leaving your spouse as prosecutor Askey implied. And the meeting Betsy did not want to go to ended up being at happened to be the meeting at the Winghaven Library the Friday before her death (the Friday after the Tuesday I spent with her at chemo and had our conversation about her life insurance) when she changed the beneficiaries of $300,000.00 from Russ and her daughters to Pam Hupp alone with no written or legal instructions on how to disperse the money. Anyone who knew Betsy knew no matter how much she and her girls fought, she almost always caved in. Even if she was mad enough at Russ (which I do not believe either) but even if that were the case, I do not believe for a second she would ever cut her girls out or left it open for Pam to decide how to disperse the money. By the way Pam only recently put A PORTION of the money in REVOKABLE trust for Betsy’s daughters. (meaning she could pull the money out if she wanted to)


      I do not understand how the jury came to their decision with the lack of evidence against Russ to begin with. Joel supplied so many facts and the prosecution was full of gaps and holes. But here is what I THINK happened. I BELIEVE the prosecutor knew that her case was weak. I THINK that is why they had SUCH IMPORTANT INFORMATION SUPPRESSED FROM THE JURY!!! IT IS MY BELIEF THAT the attorney general sent an assistant because he thought the case was weak. That is why I THINK she pulled the conspiracy theory out of her butt in her summation! I have no evidence to back this but this is what I THINK!!

      Further more, if her accusation that this was a conspiracy, those other four people are guilty of a felony. When does she plan on arresting them. She won’t because she can’t prove it. She can’t prove it because their testimony and their alibis were rock solid. If she could have proven it, they would already be arrested and in jail, like Russ. But guess what… she can’t prove it and honestly that should have blown her whole summation and her case. Why you might ask because her conspiracy theory is the only possible way she could account for where Russ’s cell phone was. His cell phone was proven by a cellular tower specialist to be too far away from their home at the time the murder was committed for Russ to have murdered Betsy. The only way possible would have been for Russ to have one or more accomplices. Thus the conspiracy theory was born. Now don’t forget, the jury was able to hear where Russ’s cell phone pings were but were not in the room when the specialist gave his testimony where Pam Hupp’s phone was pinged at the time of the murder which happened to be in the area of Betsy and Russ’s home, where the murder occurred. Unfortunately all she had to do was put that conspiracy theory in the jurors head and give them enough BS to give them, I believe she called it “reasonable inference”, you know, the opposite of reasonable doubt, and according to her that was not only OK with her but the court wanted them to do make those kinds of deductions. Since when? I thought they were suppose to convict or not convict, based on “without a reasonable doubt” not because of a “reasonable inference”. Here is the definition of reasonable inference… In the law of evidence, a truth or proposition drawn from another that is supposed or admitted to be true. A process of reasoning by which a fact or proposition sought to be established is deduced as a logical consequence from other facts, or a state of facts, already proved or admitted. A logical and reasonable conclusion of a fact not presented by direct evidence but which, by process of logic and reason, a trier of fact may conclude exists from the established facts. Inferences are deductions or conclusions that with reason and common sense lead the jury to draw from facts which have been established by the evidence in the case……. There were There were no FACTS, there was NO PROOF that she provided during the case that supported a conspiracy… none. In fact there was little evidence at all that even pointed to Russ. Her summation was completely out of line. 95% of her summation was what she called reasonable inference. Though in fact it was not, because as I said earlier, reasonable inference is based on facts and proof, and she had none supporting this thought process!!

      • Lynn

        You were right on with everything you said….I have NOTHING good to say about Lincoln Co. and their so call OFFICIALS including the Jury, they were all DEAF, DUMB and BLIND!!!!!

    • Chris Hayes

      Barbara, please have one of your friends contact me through I took very specific notes of the closing argument. Hearing it, might make it easier for them to respond to someone who tries ‘dragging them through the mud.’

  • Mike

    This trial was a joke….except no one is laughing except Betsy’s killer. The wrong person is in jail. The 4 alabi witnesses were totally credible and cellular data also backed up the alabi. Russell Faria was in O’Fallon while the murder took place in Troy. The alabi witnesses were totally slandered in court by the DA, Leah Askey and Jim Hicks.

    Thank you, Chris Hayes, for showing up every day of the trail and “being Betsy’s Voice”. Shame on Leah Askey and Jim Hicks.

  • Me

    Now we get to see the real ‘meat’ of the investigation!? Too bad they didn’t look closer into these strange pieces of evidence–an innocent man might not be in prison.

    It makes absolutely no sense to me why these very relevant and damning facts would not have been presented at trial since it clearly shows where investigators should be looking and who jurors should be passing judgment on.

    Are we really not going to take a closer look at the only person who was proven to have lied to investigators??

    Whatever crazy, misguided, unsupported stories the prosecution wants to come up with, it won’t change the fact that Russ was with his friends that night…every piece of evidence shows that is fact.

  • doubting Thomas

    When is Ms Askey planning on arresting the 4 others in this conspiracy theory. They should be held just as accountable for this as Russ, after all conspiracy to commit murder is a felony correct? Ms Askey should back her theory and prove these 4 people were involved. The law should hold her accountable for her accusations, or her accusations in her summary should not have been allowed. As Betsy’s friend, I want justice served. Not by arresting one person but by arresting whoever did it or was involved. How is this justice for Betsy? If she believes what she said is true, there should be more arrests. If not, she threw that out there to put that visual in the jury’s mind. If that is the case, the verdict should be overturned and Ms Askey should be demoted.

    Furthermore, what makes it OK for Ms Askey to imply others were involved in the murder yet Russ’s defense could not show where Pam Hupp’s phone was at the time of the murder because it implied some else may have had the motive, means and opportunity to commit the crime? Where is the justice in that?

    I can accept whatever the verdict is if it is actually proven and if all the known facts are out there. Neither Betsy’s nor Russ’s family and their friends should be 100% confident of Thursday’s outcome knowing Pam was never investigated in depth, she was the last one with Betsy, she became the beneficiary of $300,000.00, her alibi was not verified and her cell phone was still in the area of the Faria home. The jury was only given the info the prosecution wanted them to hear. Anything that cast doubt on Russ’s innocence was suppressed from the jury,

  • Me

    Right on ‘doubting Thomas’!

    And this comment is coming from one of those 4 that the prosecutor accused of accessory to murder. Ms. Askey had better charge me and my friends if she is serious about what she said at the trial.

    Of course we know that it is nothing more than a tall tale that she dreamed up. THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT HER THEORY BECAUSE IT NEVER HAPPENED!!! This is why we won’t be arrested unless we happen to venture back into Lincoln County where she can persecute anyone with impunity.

    The truth on this will eventually be told or at least further understood if not fully explained. Only then will Betsy’s voice be heard. This trial was not Betsy’s voice…this trial was a sham.

    Interesting that Ms. Askey’s accusations against us could only be made in the context that she made them in. If she was to make these same statements outside of court, she would likely be liable for a defamation or slander suit. Leah Askey is a stain upon the Lincoln County justice system.

    • Mystery

      I would suggest that the Alibi witnesses have the prosectution Ping there cell phones for the hours of 6-9 so that Russ can get a new trial sooner than later. If it is proven that all of the witnesses cell phones were also in O’fallon during that timeframe, then there is no way one of them drove Russ’s Cell out to Troy like the jury thinks.

      • He's innocent!

        What do you mean “drove his cell out to troy”? I’m confused. I do think that’s a good idea to clear their names!

      • Mystery

        To he’s innocent- If the prosecution really believes he is guilty, then they must think Russ did go to Mikes house, left his cell phone and then the guy who went to Burger King went over to Arbys and got another receipt and then drove Russ’s cell phone out to Troy. far fetched I know, but pinging the Alibi witnesses cell phones would prove that none of them left the house and drove the cell phone out to Troy to give it back to Russ. Make sense?

    • Mystery

      Pam was estranged from her mother for a long time and only came back into her life when she found out she was ill. She has scammed a few other insurance companies as well. Believe me when I say she is being investigated. She may be the reason Russ gets a new trial. By the way, I was at court when the life insurance info was suppressed and the defense attorney did not object. I am sure it was because he thought they did not need it. Hard to get that evidence b ack in when e did not object. This was several months before the trial

  • Me

    I hope the Fox 2 stays on this story.

    If I didn’t see this all personally unfold, I wouldn’t believe it would be possible in this day and age. I have to admit, I had a pretty ‘rainbows and unicorns’ view of the justice system before this all started playing out.

  • yodi-yo

    “heard the voice of betsy?” was there a clairvoyant on the jury? in the courtroom? on the stand.

    what a mockery of ppl who truly do hold that gift.

    it is obvious this man is innocent. where is the 4th amendment? “right to FAIR and speedy trial?”

  • Mystery

    One additional comment. Pam did not say she was home by 7:27. Pam said she called Betsy right after she left because she said she thought Betsy was mad at her. The cell ping that need Still needs to be done is that of Pam’s phone at 7:45 or later, it is a 30 minute drive to her house.

    If Pam could kill her at 7:10-7:20 or so an clean up, then, Russ could have done it at 9:30-9:50 when police arrived.

    Someone had to be hiding in the house, whether hired by Russ, or by Pam. Has anyone confirmed Pam’s husbands where abouts?

    And still the lingering question???? Who took Betsy’s hard drive?? Only 1-person had any reason to do that, Russ. How many coincidences are there before someone says, no way, not a coincidence

  • He's innocent!

    Not sure what your second paragraph is saying. All the EMS and fire personnel are adament the body was stiff and cold when they arrived. And they estimated she was dead for a certain period of time. Can’t remember the details but two hours, I think.

    I’m also curious about Pam’s husband. His phone records were never checked I do not believe.

    • Mystery

      My second paragraph, well, the EMS are not experts in Rigormortis. Leaving the front door open makes the body cold fast and not clear on why they did not bring in an expert on Chemo and how those drugs speed up Rigor by 10 fold. So, my second paragraph is just saying that if the defense thinks Pam did it in 15 minutes or so and then cleaned everything up, then the same could hold true if Russ got home at 9:30ish and called 911at 9:40 and first responder was there at 9:50.

      There are unfortunately many unaswered questions and if the defense wants a new trial they need additional information, like the phone info on the Alibi witnesses, on Pam and her husband and so on. I sure hate to see any innocent person spend one day in jail. Russ will be there a long time even if he gets a new trial. They need something rock solid and unfortunately, the defense now has to find something

  • Mystery

    one quick comment about the rigor mortis. The expert on the stand, the Doctor said the only way to tell if Rigor set in was to physically move the body and there is no way to tell by touching the body

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.