Jump to content



Photo

State v. Camm

Floyd County going broke

  • Please log in to reply
228 replies to this topic

#41 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 07:21 AM

And for those who STILL believe he is involved or guilty I'd like to remind them of the lost, ignored and tampered with evidence on the part of the prosecution. The witnesses who were pressured into testifying certain ways by a bullying prosecutor. The same prosecutor who would not allow the coroner on the scene for over an hour.


If you don't know which evidence was lost, ignored, or tampered with.... Then you have been SPOON FED your opinion and need to do your own research. Period.
  • snowman likes this

#42 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 03:36 PM

Share this far and wide - help others "wake up"!
http://www.wave3.com...asnt-influenced


Faith tried Camm in 2002. In that case, unknown DNA found at the scene was never identified, even though Faith says he asked for tests to be conducted.

Last year, the unknown DNA was finally identified as belonging to Boney -- the now convicted murderer Faith never considered as a suspect in 2002 would actually become his client two years later.

"I was his attorney in 2004," Faith said. "Naturally I didn't know I was sitting with a killer. It was a child support case, and termination of his probation in Bloomington."

Faith admits to driving Boney home from jail that day -- going above and beyond the duties of an attorney because of Faith's relationship with Boney's mother that dates back to the 80s.

"I've known her many years, yes, in a political arena," Faith said. "In 1986, when I was first running, she was a supporter."


Back in the summer of 2000 (June), Boney got released early. He was serving a prison sentence of 20 years, convicted in 1993. He wrote this letter to the judge: http://www.justicefo...ter_to_mann.pdf

Yet, barely 3 months later, on Sept 28, 2000 he was at the Camm residence. His palm print was on the vehicle and he left his sweatshirt behind. He also showed off his foot fetish by placing Kim's shoes on top of the car. My assumption is that the bloody shower curtain and the condoms found in the septic also had the previously "unknown" male DNA on them, otherwise the prosecutor would have made sure to point it back to David - since that's who he had his sights set on. Those two pieces of evidence got lost by the highly scientific blood stain "experts".
Charles Boney's DNA is also on Kim Camm's PANTIES.

Known, yet unknown, DNA on a sweatshirt that also had a nickname on it. Nicknames that the Dept of Corrections keep on file just for instances like this, I'd assume. Charles Boney was entered into CODIS in 1997, so if the test had been ran - they would have immediately had another suspect to interview. Yet the wonderful Stan Faith checked neither. He had his man! Why worry about who else might have been there that night and might still be on the streets ready to murder again?

#43 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 03:46 PM

Excluded evidence in trial #3:
http://groundreport....-of-david-camm/

#44 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:22 PM

Excluded evidence in trial #3:
http://groundreport....-of-david-camm/


had not read this before... unbelievable.

#45 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 07 October 2013 - 04:38 PM

Here's another thought:

There was an unknown palm print in the blood on the Bronco.

If I were a prosecutor, if I assumed David did it, yet the print was not David's....I would be demanding to know who else was there. I would make sure he was drilled and all avenues for figuring out who this other person was were explored in order to keep the streets safe.

Yet not Stan Faith! Nope. He didn't run the DNA on the sweatshirt, or the print on the Bronco. He had his man, why worry about anyone else that might have been at the scene?? The people of Floyd County might not have cared to know they let a convicted felon, now murderer, run free for FIVE YEARS before David's defense in the second trial demanded the DNA be tested.

Edited by Tina, 07 October 2013 - 04:39 PM.


#46 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 11:20 AM

https://twitter.com/WLKYMarissa

#47 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 08 October 2013 - 05:41 PM

Anyone follow the case today? Boney's DNA was ALL OVER the scene! So much for "I sold him a gun, he tried to kill me but the gun jammed, I tripped over Kim and picked up her shoes and placed them on the car, and then I got the hell out of there!"

His rare DNA was on both kids and Kim's underwear. :no:

Edited by Tina, 08 October 2013 - 05:43 PM.


#48 cyrusthegreat

cyrusthegreat

    Resident

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 238 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:20 AM

Anyone follow the case today? Boney's DNA was ALL OVER the scene! So much for "I sold him a gun, he tried to kill me but the gun jammed, I tripped over Kim and picked up her shoes and placed them on the car, and then I got the hell out of there!"

His rare DNA was on both kids and Kim's underwear. :no:


I don't know about 'all over the scene' but you are talking about the concept of 'touch dna' via the expert from Holland. While his science may be good and his conclusions sound, note that this guy's (and his labs) charges, as of 4 months ago, amounted to approximately $200K and admitted, during cross-examination by the State (which is still ongoing), total charges to could reach 1 million dollars total. Again, while his science may be good (he is an expert) and his conclusions may be sound, the jury may not buy it (testimony for sale?); moreover, the State will have a chance, during its rebuttal to refute the concept of 'touch dna' and I can just imagine what it--the State--will have to say about buying alleged expert testimony costing one million dollars during its closing argument. Jury doesn't have to believe one word out of this experts, or any other experts, mouth should it choose not too. At that price level, jury attitude might well be to not place any weight what so ever on his testimony as for the right price anybody will say anything (same thing true for blood splatter experts). Issues still very much in air.

Edited by cyrusthegreat, 09 October 2013 - 07:22 AM.


#49 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:31 AM

What has never been an issue is 11 men who all testified to the truth of David Camm's alibi.

Based on the time of death, there is no possible way he could have done it. The games lasted 20-25 minutes each and they only had one sub. It was an 8 minute drive from church and back. He supposedly had to race home at top speed, kill his family immediately, only get a few small drops of blood on him, race back to church and not get ANY blood or fibers of the crime scene in his vehicle. He also took a huge risk of being noticed gone if someone had gotten injured and needed to sit out and their sub was missing.

In the beginning the state believed all those men just fine. It wasn't until the time of death messed up their theory that they had to accuse them all of lying or being mistaken.

Soooo.... We have the word of eleven church going men WITH NOTHING TO GAIN by standing up for David. The community around here doesn't hold a high opinion of them these days thanks to the state, so what is their motive??

Versus a convicted felon with a record of increasingly more violence with each crime and record of lying. One who stands to go to prison or even the death penalty if his story isn't bought. One who was released early (8yrs) from a 20 year armed robbery sentence just three months before the Camm murders. One who was about to take 3 young co-ed college students at gun point to who knows where when the police arrived in time to rescue them.





#50 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:43 AM

I don't know about 'all over the scene' but you are talking about the concept of 'touch dna' via the expert from Holland. While his science may be good and his conclusions sound, note that this guy's (and his labs) charges, as of 4 months ago, amounted to approximately $200K and admitted, during cross-examination by the State (which is still ongoing), total charges to could reach 1 million dollars total. Again, while his science may be good (he is an expert) and his conclusions may be sound, the jury may not buy it (testimony for sale?); moreover, the State will have a chance, during its rebuttal to refute the concept of 'touch dna' and I can just imagine what it--the State--will have to say about buying alleged expert testimony costing one million dollars during its closing argument. Jury doesn't have to believe one word out of this experts, or any other experts, mouth should it choose not too. At that price level, jury attitude might well be to not place any weight what so ever on his testimony as for the right price anybody will say anything (same thing true for blood splatter experts). Issues still very much in air.


Most all expert testimony is paid for... all witnesses in all trials. I'm not sure that anyone will care about this...

The bigger picture remains that same. No reasonable person can vote to convict (beyond a reasonable doubt). If they stand true to this requirement there is no way they convict Camm...
  • Tina likes this

#51 cyrusthegreat

cyrusthegreat

    Resident

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 238 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:52 AM

Not arguing these issues with you. Again, up to jury as to whom they will believe. Realistic problem will be when the prosecutor--and he will--shows the jury pictures of the dead, bloody kids, jury will want to punish offender(s). In so far as the jury is concerned, this is not an abstract, discussion of justice or some ivory tower debate; this is real life with slaughtered people, two of which were innocent children. Very, very dangerous for the defense under any set of circumstances.

#52 grayarea

grayarea

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:55 AM

I don't know about 'all over the scene' but you are talking about the concept of 'touch dna' via the expert from Holland. While his science may be good and his conclusions sound, note that this guy's (and his labs) charges, as of 4 months ago, amounted to approximately $200K and admitted, during cross-examination by the State (which is still ongoing), total charges to could reach 1 million dollars total. Again, while his science may be good (he is an expert) and his conclusions may be sound, the jury may not buy it (testimony for sale?); moreover, the State will have a chance, during its rebuttal to refute the concept of 'touch dna' and I can just imagine what it--the State--will have to say about buying alleged expert testimony costing one million dollars during its closing argument. Jury doesn't have to believe one word out of this experts, or any other experts, mouth should it choose not too. At that price level, jury attitude might well be to not place any weight what so ever on his testimony as for the right price anybody will say anything (same thing true for blood splatter experts). Issues still very much in air.


Cyrus,

Here's the thing that gets me about costs in this case. It really doesn't matter.

You have the conundrum of whether there is any price that is too steep to keep a murderer in jail, or, to let an innocent man go free. This problem of costs wouldn't exist today were it not for the errors of the Floyd County Prosecutor's office in the first two cases. It is as easy as that. Like I posed in a post above, can the county recover on a malpractice claim against their own prosecutor? I have never seen that issue posed before...

As to the cost of this particular expert, that's what the man charges and, obviously people are willing to pay. Any expert in these matters are "guns for hire" for the side that employs them. And, when either side selects a person who's conclusions are clearly refuted, then they've wasted the money made available to spend. As technology advances, so to does the ability of DNA to be a more deciding and conclusive marker of events.

The real question you should be posing is not whether this guy is charging too much, but whether is there any cost to great when the State seeks to prove, or disprove, ones guilt.

That is why I find humor in the chest thumping about the "whatever it takes" attitude the prosecution (and some folks interviewed on local news) bellowed during the second trial. The notion that the defense is spending too much to prove non-guilt of a crime of this magnitude is simply morally depraved. It's like saying that, "yes we have to fund your defense by law, but only as much as we want too." The notion is utterly ridiculous. But, by way of the prosecution's bungling and the re-election of the prosecutor in charge of the second trial, Floyd County has asked for this. Now that the billed is delivered to be paid, they want to howl. if you're seeking to take a man's freedom, you better be prepared to pay. It's just that simple.
  • snowman and Tina like this

#53 Quasar

Quasar

    Dux Ducis

  • Administrators
  • 6,636 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:56 AM

Not arguing these issues with you. Again, up to jury as to whom they will believe. Realistic problem will be when the prosecutor--and he will--shows the jury pictures of the dead, bloody kids, jury will want to punish offender(s). In so far as the jury is concerned, this is not an abstract, discussion of justice or some ivory tower debate; this is real life with slaughtered people, two of which were innocent children. Very, very dangerous for the defense under any set of circumstances.


I agree however someone else has been convicted of this crime... I don't know how much of this is being kept from the jury. If they convict, another mistrial may be in order.
  • Tina likes this

#54 grayarea

grayarea

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 08:04 AM

Not arguing these issues with you. Again, up to jury as to whom they will believe. Realistic problem will be when the prosecutor--and he will--shows the jury pictures of the dead, bloody kids, jury will want to punish offender(s). In so far as the jury is concerned, this is not an abstract, discussion of justice or some ivory tower debate; this is real life with slaughtered people, two of which were innocent children. Very, very dangerous for the defense under any set of circumstances.


Who is to say that Camm's attorneys won't use the same pictures and point the finger at Boney...who's DNA is all in places it shouldn't be? Boney is a proven liar that will say anything for his own gain and...pretty much...just to be saying anything. For instance, he is supposedly running for his life from a gun waiving Camm and trips over Kim's shoes. He then claims he took the time...remember, his story is Camm is trying to shoot him at this point...picked up Kim's shoes and placed them neatly where they were found. A complete crock! If it were me, I'd use the pictures to my favor, remind the jurors of the "evidence" they heard and take the "big bang" effect of the pictures away from the prosecution. Then remind the jurors that there are 11 men that were with Camm at the time the murders were committed. I don't think you're giving the thought process of the jurors much credit.
  • Tina likes this

#55 Tina

Tina

    Tinacious

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,739 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:57 PM

Gary Dunn testified today. He is the private investigator for the defense that interviewed Boney. He was an FBI agent for 27 years prior. He showed the call log from Boney's phone at the time he was identified and all of the hours Boney spent on the phone with the prosecutors office between February 18th and March 4th when he was arrested. None of these calls were recorded. 29 from Boney to the prosecutor, 4 from the prosecutor to Boney. Oh and it was pointed out that all we have is Boney's word that him and David ever met. The prosecution also ran all those records as well as phone records in 2000 as well as all of the payphones near Boney's house and no calls were ever made from David to Boney or vise versa from any known numbers.

So as soon as the CODIS match was made, Boney was actually calling the prosecutor's office. The same prosecutor that had been his defense attorney a year prior.

Nothing inappropriate here folks! Move along!

#56 grayarea

grayarea

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 11 October 2013 - 07:42 AM

I don't see any mention of just where is the murder weapon. It was never found. So, add that into your timeline of leaving a basketball game that 11 other people never said he did. Racing home. Shooting up his family. Getting back into an automobile and racing back to a ball game...without getting any blood into the car...then resuming to play basketball with 11 guys that said he never left. When and where did he dispose of the murder weapon?

Reasonable doubt is all over this case.
  • Tina likes this

#57 Overit

Overit

    Closed by Request

  • Account Closed
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,322 posts

Posted 11 October 2013 - 08:50 PM

I would HATE to be on that jury.

#58 stewartfan14

stewartfan14

    Resident

  • Account Closed
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 12 October 2013 - 05:50 AM

He walks this time.

#59 karen

karen

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 929 posts

Posted 12 October 2013 - 07:52 AM

I wish our courts were about finding the "truth". It seems that if you can have two different "experts" testifying to two different truths on the same topic that it comes down to who is more believable, not who is speaking the truth. I also think that there was nothing wrong with the first jury hearing about Camm's girlfriends and the second jury being told about the possible molestation and Kim's plans to go to Florida. On the flip side, I think that everything with Boney and his fetishes should be allowed. As a juror, I would want to know everything so I could base my decision on the whole picture, not what the system thinks should be allowed.

#60 Overit

Overit

    Closed by Request

  • Account Closed
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,322 posts

Posted 12 October 2013 - 11:23 AM

I have said from the start that I couldn't vote guilty because there was a shadow of a doubt. I still think he was in some way involved but I would have to go with not guilty. Because of the ball players I have always had some doubt if he actually pulled the trigger. Involved in it somehow?.......yes, in my opinion..........pulled the trigger?........doubtful
  • karen and Tina like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users