DRUMMOND V HOUK from Ohio 2010 states in the caselaw https://casetext.com/case/drummond-v-houk that Fabian was not credible in representing his credentials where he lied to the defense claiming he was a gang expert then claiming in open court he wasn't, as well as his testimony was considered suspect. Fabian was not being completely truthful on the stand nor was he prepared for trial and lied about not being given adequate time, which Fabian blamed on others for his failures. On top of which Fabian could not even recall his testimony from early in the day and had to have the transcript read back to him and even got confused over his own testimony . It was even stated in the caselaw that counsel cannot be held responsible for the misrepresentations or omissions of Dr. Fabian.
The depositions of Dr. Fabian and trial counsel Gentile and Yarwood presented competing pictures of the defense team's mitigation investigation and preparation. While both parties conceded that Dr. Fabian did not perform well during his mitigation testimony, Dr. Fabian faulted counsel for his failures. He maintained that counsel did not provide him with adequate time to prepare, did not obtain a gang expert despite his request for one, and failed to provide him with information regarding Drummond's half-brother, Michael Brooks.
Trial counsel disputed most of Dr. Fabian's allegations. First, counsel claimed that Dr. Fabian indicated he could testify about Drummond's involvement with gangs. Counsel also disputed that Dr. Fabian ever asked them for additional time to prepare for his testimony. Counsel also were unaware of any documents or information that Dr. Fabian believed he lacked, including information regarding Michael Brooks. The Court therefore issued the Order to Show Cause for Respondent to explain why an evidentiary hearing was not necessary to resolve these factual disputes.
#47 of 93
Dr. Fabian nor the OPD contacted him after the alleged conversation. ( Id. at 129-30.) On the contrary, Gentile testified that Dr. Fabian never expressed any concerns regarding the case; in particular, he never told Gentile that he was having any trouble getting information from family members. Gentile stated that expressions of such concerns would have been "red flags," but that he had no recollection of any such concerns in this case.
#56 of 93
Thus, Dr. Fabian was clearly apprised of this information in advance of his trial testimony. At a later point in his testimony at the hearing before this Court, Dr. Fabian became confused about his testimony from earlier that day:
#64 of 93 Fabian lied about his expertise of being a gang expert leading the defense to believe they didn't need to gang expert. Court felt that Fabian lied
During the evidentiary hearing before this Court, both parties questioned defense counsel regarding their reasons for not hiring a "gang expert." In short, Gentile and Yarwood testified that, based upon Dr. Fabian's representations regarding his credentials and experience, they believed he could testify about crucial mitigating factors as effectively as any "gang expert." Dr. Fabian's testimony, however, directly contradicted defense counsel's. He stated during the evidentiary hearing, "I told them I was not a gang expert. I could testify to my involvement in gangs in my evaluations but, you know, to my knowledge or recollection, I prefaced that by saying I don't have a Ph.D. in criminology or sociology relevant to gangs in the United States." (ECF No. 96, Hr'g Tr., at 144.) Dr. Fabian and defense counsel also had diametrically opposing views regarding the adequacy of time Dr. Fabian had to prepare for his trial testimony. As noted above, Dr. Fabian insisted that he told counsel three or four times that he had concerns regarding the time he had to prepare for trial. Neither defense counsel, however,
testified that Dr. Fabian expressed his concerns to them; in fact, they both testified affirmatively that he did not express such concerns. ( Id. at 125, 191.)
After observing the demeanor of the witnesses, and reviewing the evidence presented, the Court finds the testimony of trial counsel credible, and finds the testimony of Dr. Fabian suspect. As the Court previously noted, Dr. Fabian struggled to recall his own testimony from earlier that day at the evidentiary hearing, and requested that the transcript be read back to him, suggesting to the Court (and the Court so finds) that he was not being completely truthful in his testimony. Dr. Fabian was not credible when he testified regarding his recollection about what he told Drummond's trial counsel seven years prior regarding his ability to testify about gangs. Instead, the Court finds it quite believable that (as trial counsel indicated) Dr. Fabian would have convincingly represented to Drummond's trial counsel — given his credentials and experience — that he was qualified to present the necessary expert testimony regarding gangs and Drummond's involvement with gangs. Moreover, despite the fact that the Court had a separation of witnesses order in effect during the hearing, defense counsel were both consistent and credible in testifying that Dr. Fabian never expressed concerns about having sufficient time to prepare for his testimony. It is inconceivable that neither of Drummond's trial counsel would recall Dr. Fabian making a request for more time to prepare had such a request been made (which the Court finds it had not), particularly because Gentile stated during the evidentiary hearing that, had Dr. Fabian articulated such a concern, he "wouldn't have gotten [sic] in [the courtroom] if he needed more time. Nobody would have forced me to go in there. I would have appealed to the judge and the judge would have granted it."
In believing the testimony of defense counsel over Dr. Fabian, this Court finds that the decision of trial counsel relative to retaining Dr. Fabian to testify regarding Drummond's involvement in gangs and in not hiring a different "gang expert" was not unreasonable. The Court also finds that trial counsel's decision relative to the investigation, preparation and presentation of mitigation testimony as it relates to Dr. Fabian's testimony was not unreasonable. Specifically, the Court finds that, prior to taking the witness stand, Dr. Fabian never relayed to counsel (or Hardy) that he needed more time to investigate or that he was unable to testify about gang life and its effects on the individuals who join them. On the contrary, this Court finds that it was reasonable for counsel to rely on Dr. Fabian's self-described experience with gang members and to presume that Dr. Fabian had sufficient time to prepare for his trial testimony absent any credible assertions to the contrary. See, e.g., Campbell v. Coyle, 260 F.3d 531, 551 (6th Cir. 2001) ("an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim cannot survive so long as the decisions of a defendant's trial counsel were reasonable, even if mistaken") (citing White v. McAninch, 235 F.3d 988, 995 (6th Cir. 2000)). Here, counsel cannot be held responsible for the misrepresentations or omissions of Dr. Fabian. Accordingly, sub-claims 1, 2, and 7 are not well-taken.
That case was later referenced by the Ohio Supreme Court in 2014 comparing another case's forensics expert to Fabian, as to use Fabian as an example as to a forensics expert that is not only neither credible or truthful but also overcharges his clients.
https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2014/2014-ohio-5228.pdf pages 29-31
Fabian even admits in the Texas 2022 murder trial of Dabrett Black That he says "Taking the stand is the worst part of the job." https://twitter.com/ClayFalls/status/1501603164738441220
DRUMMOND V HOUK was one of many cases referenced by Special Prosecutor Mark R Weaver https://www.isaacwiles.com/professional/mark-r-weaver/ and www.communicationscounsel.com/weaver-bio and https://www.linkedin.com/in/markrweaver/ and https://twitter.com/MarkRWeaver during the sentencing phase of STATE OF OHIO V GRATE in Ohio in 2018 to discredit Fabian. Shawn Grate was serial killer convicted of murder whose defense hired Fabian for $18,000 and testified in the sentencing phase in an attempt for Grate to avoid the death penalty. The expenses Fabian was racking up along with the lack progress by Fabian on finishing his reports was becoming a concern by The Court as ultimately the taxpayers of Ohio would be ultimately footing the bill. https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/local/northeast-ohio/trial-phase-of-suspected-serial-killer-shawn-grate-will-go-on-as-scheduled/95-543812877
Ashland County Prosecutor Chris Tunnell said the request was "deeply troubling to the state," adding the motion came much later than it should have and that he's not even sure it's necessary. He asked for a hearing on the matter, which was held Friday afternoon via Skype. Tunnell and Common Pleas Judge Ron Forsthoefel questioned Dr. John Fabian, who contacted the defense team on Tuesday about the need for additional review "over and above the traditional MRI results." He added this field of study is very specialized. This also seems to indicate that for Fabian to turn in a report in a reasonable time such as to the FAA he uses pre-made templates ,which confirms Joe LoRusso statement that FAA bought and paid for hacks take ready made reports and just change the names which is malpractce.
Further down in the article
The judge asked how long a preliminary analysis would take. Fabian said less than a week. "I'm trying to be a good steward of the taxpayer dollars," Forsthoefel said. "My whole concern is that the state have an opportunity to review these test results." "I'm not trying to sandbag the court or prosecutors," Fabian said. "I'm not looking to delay the trial."
These concerns were very much warranted because over a year prior the State completed it's psychological evaluation of Grate and Fabian stated at that time he needed more time. https://www.richlandsource.com/ashland_source/one-doctor-rules-accused-serial-killer-shaun-grate-sane-second/article_1dc56f52-0284-11e7-be83-efa9a4e103e5.html For Fabian to say that someone is "cognitively slow" yet he himself cannot be held to reasonable deadlines sure shows he isn't exactly cognitively up to speed himself. Fabian is outright gaslighing his patients at this point.
Fabian demanding more tests for the sake of it also showed that he was more interested padding the bill than completing his reports to the point The Judge called him out on it and this would not be the first time the courts called Fabian out on Fabian's excessive billing as pointed by by the Ohio Supreme Court.
Videos of the entire direct and cross examination of John Matthew Fabian start here on video labeled Pt2 . www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jnndclBzPM and conclude on Pt 3 youtu.be/nmO2yi59qOU Below is detailed how Weaver picked apart Fabian at every level where the jury did not believe anything Fabian stated about Grate and sentenced Grate to death. Weaver to this day touts not only the conviction of Grate but also the death penalty sentence.
https://twitter.com/MarkRWeaver/status/1578377214889975808?t=udzRHY-LH1B9Q97evIfvWA&s=19
In April 2025 in San Antonio Texas had the same credibility problem when under cross examination during the murder trial ofTaymor Travon McIntyre aka Tay-K. Prosecutor Jason Garrahan began the state’s cross-examination of Fabian, who admitted he listened to some of McIntyre’s music and read some news articles related to the case. The Defense tried to have this blocked but the Judge affirmed that anything that Fabian reviewed can be asked during cross examination. This specifically includes music that the defendant created that included inciting lyrics while he was a fugitive of justice glorifying the murders he committed and even bragging that he cut off his ankle monitor. robbing then shooting point blank Mark Anthony Saldivar murdering him in cold blood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay-K . Garrahan asked Fabian multiple questions on whether or not he remembered certain lyrics from “The Race.”
“Do you remember, ‘But I ain’t beat that case; b----, I did the race.’ Do you recall that?” Garrahan asked Fabian.
“I do recall that line,” Fabian said.
“And what about the line, ‘Shoot a f---boy in his m-----f------ face.’” Garrahan asked Fabian.
“I don’t recall that,” Fabian said.
“It says, ‘I’m little Tay-K, I don’t think you want no (sic) action; You want action? You get turned into past tense.’ You recall that?” Garrahan asked.
“I believe I recall that line,” Fabian said.
“What about, ‘Smith & Wesson made my .9 with some compassion,’” Garrahan asked.
“I remember the Smith & Wesson reference,” Fabian said.
This is the music video in question. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYhXJaEbw7c It has over 250 million views. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Race_(Tay-K_song) It even charted number 44 on the Billboard top 100 and was certified RIAA Platinum, meaning it had the equivalent of 1 million record sales because it was also distributed by RCA Records, a division of Sony Music Entertainment. This was all attributed to the fact the song was made glorifying McIntyre's murders and being a fugitive from justice.
What's even more disturbing 2 hour 51 min 03 sec https://www.youtube.com/live/sAagZBrNUyk?si=Q5BhP2JD2iIIPG0c&t=10263 Prosecution points out that the song was very well known to the public. He asks Fabian did he listen to the song the race and watch the video. Fabian says in a word salad, "um... yeah I didn't I didn't watch the whole thing but I got a good... glimpse of an idea of it" It was a 1 minute 44 seconds long, how did Fabian not have the attention spend of less than two minutes to watch this as part of his job?!?!? If that's the case wouldn't Fabian have a form of ADHD that would disqualify him from having an FAA Medical? So how is he qualified to make that determination of other people? Seems like gaslighting to take out his own shortcoming on Pilots that can actually pass checkrides to FAA standards.
It should also be pointed out that Fabian was testifying via Zoom and not in the courtroom because he was in Houston testifying on another murder case. meaning there was the opportunity to coach Fabian off camera. The fact that he "could not recall" at the very least shows that Dr. Fabian is not a credible witness to when facts are concerned. If fact it also shows his bias against "self-reliant guys" where those lyrics weren't a red flag to him where he could not recall them especially when they were about bragging about killing people and being a fugitive from justice. Ultimately the jury came back with a guilty verdict for murder and an 80 year sentence, however the prosecution was asking for a capital murder conviction which is an automatic life without parole sentence.
https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2025/04/09/taymor-tay-k-mcintyres-capital-murder-trial-reaches-seventh-day-on-wednesday/ Video of the trial testimony https://www.youtube.com/live/sAagZBrNUyk?si=QZzBdNA8l2TYDFOR&t=3260 breakdown of the testimony here. https://sites.google.com/site/no2cog/supporting-evidence/example-of-faa-3rd-party-doctors-that-committing-malpractice-against-pilots/fabian-trial-testimony-from-tay-k-case
That other case in Houston against Xavier Davis who was indicted for killing a young couple and their six year old daughter, shot point blank in the head, in a murder for hire had Fabian admit that the defendant was malingering mental issues to gain favor with the courts. , but then said "“But there are legitimate mental health issues in this case,” Fabian said. Prosecutor Alycia Harvey gleaned testimony that Fabian clocked about 80 hours on Davis’ case with an hourly rate of $350 — which adds up to about $28,000. suspect plead guilty of capital murder and was sentenced to death. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/projects/2025/xavier-davis-death-penalty-trial-updates/
It would not be surprising Fabian was paid at least that much if not more by McIntyre because he earned $700,000 from the song and spent at least $500,000 on his legal fees. https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/rapper-tay-k-spent-most-of-700000-recording-contract-on-lawyers-testimony/212241/