Megan Bruton

Mrs.  Bruton lied repeatedly and prosecutors knew it. 

Megan’s Campaign to Convict Scott

From the day Scott was indicted in November of 2005 to this day Mrs. Bruton has waged both a covert and public effort to convict Scott. Literally days after Scott was indicted, Mrs.Bruton began an internet campaign to influence anyone who would listen that Scott was an “evil” person who allegedly would do anything to win at all costs because he was “crazy as a fox”. She started this campaign by emailing the crime blogger Steve Huff, who would later moderate the blog that covered the case.

As you can read in her blog posts and emails, Mrs. Bruton relentlessly lobbied Mr. Huff and others. Although she identified herself to Mr. Huff, her public campaign was done anonymously by the use of seven different false identities and in conjunction with both her father and aunt also using false identities.

The facts obtained by subpoena show that Mrs. Bruton’s seven false identities posted fifty-seven times to the blog. Her family posted dozens more with multiple identities, as well. Posting to a blog anonymously is done every day by many; however, doing so by the major witness during a trial in an effort, described by Mrs. Bruton’s own words, to “influence the jury” if they couldn’t “resist the urge to peek at the internet for news on the trial” is very troubling, Mrs. Bruton repeatedly described her version of events in the third person, as if she were some close friend of herself. Most troubling, however, is that her description of important events changes from her testimony at trial concerning crucial events.

Megan First to Divulge Coffin “Shot in the Head”

The most important of these changes that she, herself, stated in emails was “true” and “accurate” concerned how she learned Mr. Coffin’s cause of death. Over the years her story has changed often. Facts clearly show that she was the first person to know Mr. Coffin had been “shot in the head”.

Megan is responsible for the only claim that suggests that Scott was the first person to divulge that Mr. Coffin had been “shot”. In fact, however, all the evidence shows that Scott only repeated what Megan had told him and that Megan was, in fact, the first person to say that Mr. Coffin had been “shot in the head”.

The evidence is as follows: At around 12:00 a.m. on, now early morning, Wednesday, December 11, 1996, Megan called her best friend Jen Johnson. (Megan 1st Call). Jen’s husband Mike heard what sounded like a frantic call from a female playing through their answering machine. Mike got out of bed to listen to the call from Patricia Flavin, Craig Foster’s girl friend, who called to tell the Johnsons to call Megan immediately as it was an emergency. She was at Coffin’s neighbors’ house. Jen joined Mike to listen to the message. As they were listening, Megan called them from the neighbor’s and said that the burglars had come back, and Mr. Coffin had been “shot in the head” and his house burned. He had been “murdered”. Mike heard this repeated and noted the 12:08 time on both the microwave in front of him and the answering machine. (This was documented in a virtually contemporaneous note that Mike’s mom would write the next morning. )

The Johnsons were shocked, and immediately wondered how Megan could possibly know this, since Coffin’s house was on fire and it wasn’t being reported on the news, which the Johnsons had on the television. They questioned Megan about this, but got no response. There was no mention that Scott had told her this.

Then, at 12:18 a. m., based on Scott’s home-phone records, Megan called Scott and told him that Coffin had been “shot” and was dead. Both Craig Foster and Patricia Flavin were standing next to Megan as she spoke to Scott, when they both heard her say to Scott, “Scott, David’s dead. He’s been shot”, as described in their police interviews. They both asked her, “How do you know that?, but Megan never answered and made no claim that Scott had told her this.

It should be noted that during Megan’s call to Scott, APD Officer O’Connor Scott’s neighbor Greg Gatley were standing next to Scott while he spoke with Megan. Neither one of them heard Scott say that Coffin had been “shot” or “shot in the head”, as they testified at the trial.

Later that morning, at around 4:45 am, Scott repeated to Detective Chambers what Megan had told him, that Coffin had been “shot”, Chambers immediately claimed Scott was the murderer, because even the police did not know how Coffin had died and would not know until later that day, after the autopsy was started.

It is important to note that Scott never said “shot in the head”; only “shot”, Scott again told Chambers that Megan had told him this information. Chambers reportedly asked Megan if she had told Scott this, but she said, “I don’t know how he died”. Again, she did not claim that Scott told her that Coffin had been “shot in the head”.

The next lengthy conversation Jen Johnson had with Megan was on Saturday, December 21, 1996, by telephone, for two and one-half hours, Megan stated that she had become “close” with the homicide detectives, which, in itself, is inappropriate. Jen again asked Megan how she knew Coffin had been shot in the head, Megan stated, “Did I say that? I must have told Scott that, too.” She tried somehow to blame it on the fact that she took Valium. How could Valium give someone specific knowledge of Coffin’s cause of death? It might be believable to assume when someone was murdered that he was shot; however, to assume, and be precisely correct, that someone was “shot in the head” is not credible. In an interview with Scott’s lawyers, she didn’t say Scott told her Coffin was shot. She also states in an interview that she called Jen before she called Scott.

For the next one and one-half years, Megan never claimed a new story. Even during a lengthy interview with “Atlanta Magazine”, during numerous other interviews, or in her personal notes Megan never claimed that Scott told her that Coffin had been shot. In fact, in one of her state interviews, Megan says she told Scott that Coffin was dead. Only during an interview in Hawaii with the Coffin family after the first $100,000 reward was offered did Megan “suddenly recall” that Scott told her Coffin was “shot in the head”.

She offered no explanation for this sudden complete change, other than that she claimed “memory is tricky”. On the Huff crime blog, she anonymously posted , that she equated remembering the specific details of a traumatic event to suddenly remembering where one left “a pair of sunglasses or some keys”. Apparently, to her, the two events are similar in magnitude.

In one post on the crime blog, Megan gave yet another explanation for these events. She claimed that the Fire Chief at the scene of Coffin’s burned house told her that he had been “murdered” and, when she heard the word “murdered”, assumed “shot”. Her trial testimony did not say this and neither did the testimony of the fire chief.

This gives another version that does not involve Scott telling her this incriminating information. Even Fulton County D.A. Paul Howard, in his pre-trial testimony, admitted that he believed Megan told Scott this information. Inexplicably, however, prosecutors allowed Megan to commit blatant perjury on the stand.

Megan’s Deception and Adultery

Throughout Scott and Megan’s relationship she was deceitful and during their marriage she was unfaithful, as evidenced by her own admissions. Early in their relationship Megan began what was a pattern of deception, which again shows that her words and testimony cannot be trusted.

A few months into their relationship Megan flunked out of the University of Georgia, yet she pretended she was still attending school and continued to accept tuition money from her parents. This charade continued through “graduation” and her professional life. During their marriage Megan asked Scott to “create” her a diploma, but he did not.

This is just one example of the way Megan operated. As you can also read in the Johnson interview, Megan admitted to Jen that she (Megan) had been “unfaithful to Scott during our marriage”. Megan maintained a relationship with an old boyfriend, Dr. Jeff Reich, throughout her marriage to Scott. Phone records show that Megan called Reich on a regular basis, despite her promise not to do so.

Other examples include a fifty-year-old billionaire from New York whom Megan met on a trip to Chicago for the Democratic National Convention during Scott and Megan’s anniversary weekend! Megan called Jen before the anniversary and told her that she (Megan) was going to go see the billionaire in New York and also see Dr. Reich, as he lived there too. Jen advised Megan not to go, and she said, reluctantly, that she wouldn’t, but would instead, go to Charlotte. N.C. to see a friend.

Later, Megan told Jen that she (Megan) had gone to Charlotte just as she had told Scott and his mother. Megan even stated she and her friend had had a “hurricane party”! But when Jen asked Megan about the hurricane, Megan admitted going to New York to see the men. She had often said that she wanted to be a “kept woman” in a lavish lifestyle, and these men could make that possible.

This kind of deceptive behavior turned out to be a way of life for Megan, but Scott did not know about it until the information came out during the investigation of these crimes. When Scott was dating Megan she once claimed to be flying to see her sister in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; however, he later found out that instead, she had gone to see Dr. Reich in New York. Scott found out about the weekend trip she made on their anniversary when he received a bill for Megan’s visit to the Emergency Room at Northwestern Hospital for treatment following blacking out after partying late one evening in Chicago. She had never told Scott about it.

One deception, that bordered on criminal behavior occurred when Megan tried to levee a sexual assault charge against her boss Jon Teasley. As detailed in the Johnson interview. Megan admitted that during a business trip to Athens, Georgia with Teasley, there was supposedly “only one motel room available in town”. After a night of entertaining and partying with clients, Megan returned to the room they shared. Megan went to sleep and Teasley stayed out drinking. Later, Megan woke up in bed with Teasley and he had his hand up her shirt. She stopped him.

It was not discussed again until Megan hatched a plan to secretly record Teasley on the telephone admitting what he had done at the motel. She planned to use the tape to get a promotion at work. The effort failed.

As the Johnsons noted, Scott never exhibited violence toward Teasley, despite being asked by Megan to deal with him, Teasley, on a social basis because he was still her boss. Mike Johnson even stated that he had “never seen Scott exhibit any violence or jealousy”, despite all Megan’s lying and maintaining relationships with former boyfriends. Scott just wanted her to tell the truth. All of this is documented in the Johnson interview.

Also noted in the interview was Megan’s attempt to have the Johnsons “stash silverware” at their house, apparently to hide it from Scott during their divorce negotiations. During the trial, prosecutor Sheila Ross repeatedly insinuated that there was no reason for Scott to contest the divorce because Megan wanted little in the settlement. That was patently false. In fact, Megan was trying to take everything of value she couId get away with and initially made absurd claims for payments from Scott, as the divorce documents show.

When Megan did not immediately get what she wanted, she simply took it. In October of 1996, when Scott was away on a business trip, Megan drove a U-Haul truck to Scott’s house, without his prior consent or knowledge, and took all of the valuable items from the marriage. She took expensive silverware, artwork, the new furniture, china, silver service items and expensive gifts that they had accumulated as a couple.

This was neither discussed nor agreed upon by Scott or in the divorce negotiations. Megan continued to pay bills out of Scott’s bank account, and simply didn’t pay bills with that had Scott’s name on them, even though she was in possession of the items. This continued into December, 1996. On top of this, Scott became responsible for all the house payments, insurance, and taxes.

Megan claimed during the trial that she split items fairly and left Scott with the “everyday china and silver”, which was, in fact, all the items of lesser quality and 1/50th the value of the items she took. In reality, what she left Scott with were mostly the items he came into the marriage with along with his business computer equipment. She ran off with all the nice items and her $14,000 wedding ring. He was left with the rest.

Despite prosecutor Ross’ sleight of hand and mischaracterization of Scott during the divorce proceedings, Scott’s continuing challenge of the divorce settlement forced Megan to withdraw false claims of “emotional cruelty”, in the final settlement. She admitted that this claim was false and a mistake, but had tried to levee it for many months. Megan pretended she was being fair and unbiased but, in reality, she was trying to use Scott’s desire to try to reconcile to her financial advantage.

Every time Scott would try to assert his desire for a fair settlement, Megan would claim this was only pushing her away further, and Scott would back off. In December of 1996, when Scott began pushing harder for the return of items and payment for bills, Megan became more aggressive with her threats. Scott told her he would give evidence of her infidelity, and this enraged Megan.

Much can be seen in the Johnson interview and other documents. It is very important to know that Jen Johnson had a very strong motivation to favor Megan in statements. Jen and Megan had been friends since the seventh grade and were in each other’s weddings. It was very hard for Jen to disclose unfavorable information about her friend, and this is why her statements are such powerful evidence against Megan.

Prosecutor Ross would again mischaracterize the statements of the Johnsons as Mike’s effort to force his wife to say these things about Megan; however, the contemporaneous note made by Mike’s mother and other witnesses’ similar observations of Megan, as well as the transcript of her call with Scott’s father show that Megan cannot be trusted.

Megan Impeached

Megan continued her deception in her testimony at the trial. She took every opportunity to exaggerate and perjure herself in order to convict Scott. She slanted everything negatively, where possible. She testified that Scott had shown up at her workplace to harass her , among other things; however, as shown in the transcript of a call Megan had with Scott’s father on January 4, 1997, she was proven to be lying. She stated, specifically, that Scott never showed up at her door, work, or Coffin’s house. She also said in the call that Scott’s many calls to her were not new. She admitted that this was how it always had been. In fact, this was how Scott had always reacted and she had responded throughout their relationship.

Megan’s life of deception throws a huge question mark on all her trial testimony, her motivations, and the State’s case. Claiming that Scott was the first to reveal Mr. Coffin’s cause of death was a cornerstone in the foundation of the accusations against Scott.

Megan’s Blog Posts and Emails

As other blog posts and emaiIs reveal, Mrs. Bruton admitted that she was “biased”. She called Scott’s lawyers “paid accomplices” for what she falsely claimed was “Team Davis” coordinated blog posts in support of Scott. In fact, subpoenaed I.P. addresses and email addresses prove there were no posts from Scott, his family, or his lawyers. The subpoenas do, however, show coordinated posts from Mrs. Bruton in Australia as well as her father and Aunt Maggie.

Additionally, an email reveals Mrs. Bruton communicating and discussing her testimony with Steve Huff, in between her days of testimony, in direct and blatant defiance of the trial court’s explicit instruction not to discuss her testimony with anyone. This disregard for the witness sequestration rule shows that she has no problem breaking the law and has no respect for the court. She even admits in this email that she shouldn’t be posting.

Other correspondence shows a woman who, as herself claimed in public that she was afraid for her safety, but as one of her anonymous false identities taunted Scott on the blog to testify because he is “gutless”. She repeatedly and in conjunction with her father and aunt professed herself to be “brave” and “beautiful”.

Post-trial Mrs. Bruton continued her campaign of spite, professing that she was “secretly looking forward to seeing the footage of [Scott’s girlfriend] collapsing on the floor” after the guilty verdict was read. She pressured Mr. Huff in an effort stop him from complying with the lawful subpoena so that her behind the scenes behavior could be hidden or covered up.

Overall, Mrs. Bruton’s own words destroy her credibility and impeach her testimony. These words, behavior and manipulation throw doubt on her trial testimony and pose questions about her role in the crimes against Mr. Coffin. Clearly she is not the innocent person she claims to be.

View Mrs Bruton’s own words in the Evidence Vault.