Attorneys representing a teen charged with shooting and killing his parents in their Bellaire-area home in 2016 are asking a judge to dismiss murder charges against their client.
In a motion filed Tuesday, attorneys Rick DeToto and Chris Collings claim the case against Antonio Armstrong, Jr. should be thrown out after several violations by the Harris County District Attorney’s Office.
According to the motion, the DA’s office failed to turn over information and audio/video recordings related to a report that the teen’s father, Antonio Armstrong, Sr., alleging he was involved in a prostitution ring before his murder.
“We were told that none exist,” the defense attorneys claim in the motion, only to be later given 50,000 pages of phone records and an audio interview about the subject by Houston police.
“The defense was told, during the pending juvenile case against Mr. Armstrong around March of 2017, that this allegation of prostitution…was investigated and that it was not credible thus indicating that their investigation was complete,” the motion reads.
The informant who reported the alleged prostitution ring to police also claimed Antonio Armstrong, Sr. received death threats prior to his shooting.
For 18 months, the defense claims it was kept in the dark about this information and that this is a violation of their client’s constitutional right to a fair trial under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Neighbors and friends remembered Antonio Armstrong, Sr. and wife Dawn as being very active in the community and a loving family.
The former NFL football player was well-known in the Bellaire area as a fitness advocate, coach and even an associate pastor.
We have reached out to the Armstrong family for a response.
The Harris County District Attorney’s Office said in a statement Monday:
“This document was submitted as a standard pre-trial motion by the defense in preparation for an upcoming trial. We welcome the opportunity to present all the facts regarding this matter to a judge- be that in writing or at a hearing, as determined by the court. We reserve additional comment until that time.”
