As we continue to follow the legal proceedings surrounding the murder of Tomitka, we have some important updates to share.
Original Purpose of the October 31st Motion Hearing
The motion hearing scheduled for October 31st was originally intended to address two critical requests from Jerrod’s lawyer:
- To remove certain prior statements made by Jerrod Stewart from being used at trial, arguing they should be inadmissible.
- To suppress GPS-related evidence, claiming it was obtained unlawfully. We’re not sure if this relates to the GPS device that was located in Tomitka’s car or the ankle monitor (I believe) Jerrod was wearing.
These motions are significant. If granted, they could potentially remove key information the prosecution intends to use to present the full truth at trial.
Defense Requests More Time
On October 22nd, Stewart’s defense filed new motions requesting:
- A postponement of the October 31st motion hearing. The defense claims that one of their necessary witnesses is unavailable on that date.
- An adjournment (rescheduling) of the upcoming December trial. They argue they require additional time to conduct further investigation.
These filings ultimately seek to push the proceedings — and the path to closure — further down the calendar.
Judge’s Response
The presiding judge has now agreed to:
1) Reschedule the October 31st motion hearing to a later date (to be announced), and
2) Move the trial date to a future date after the rescheduled motion hearing is resolved.
Both new dates will be announced in court on October 31st, 2025.
It is likely this proceeding will be brief, possibly lasting only a few minutes.
Why Attendance Still Matters
Despite the limited scope of the October 31st appearance, we are urging all supporters who are able to attend. There may be no dramatic arguments or testimonies that day — but your physical presence shows the court that the community is watching, we’re still waiting for closure, and it reiterates that Tomitka had loved ones that care.
Looking Ahead
Once the newly scheduled motion hearing takes place, the court will determine whether Stewart’s prior statements may be used, and whether GPS evidence is lawful and admissible at trial. It will ultimately determine how and when the trial should proceed.
Final Thoughts
Every postponement is another day without closure. We cannot control the legal (stall tactics?) strategies at play — but we can control whether we show up.
The continuous delays aren’t all bad news. Assuming everything goes as we expect if things go to trial, our patience now can potentially limit some appeal options for Jerrod in the future. If the judge didn’t reschedule the motion hearing or the trial, the defense could later argue they’re entitled to a new trial due to X,Y, and Z.
(We fully expect X, Y, and Z to still exist as an argument for future appeals, but the current delays limit what those options can be.)