« Law - "Same-sex parenting is a done deal." | Main | Ind. Courts - Use of mouth swabs for drug testing receives continued scrutiny in Porter courts »

Monday, March 13, 2006

Ind. Courts - Camm and Behrman cases continue in the news

"Don’t rule out another Camm trial" was the headline to a long story this weekend in the New Albany News-Tribune. Some quotes:

NEW ALBANY — David Camm may be behind bars, sentenced to life in prison for killing his family, but he refuses to go quietly.

Instead, the former state trooper and his defense team are gearing up for their biggest challenge yet — convincing the Indiana Court of Appeals to grant them a third trial.

Camm, 41, has spent the past 5 1/2 years in prison for the murders of his wife, Kim, and children, Brad, 7, and Jill, 5. The family was gunned down as they returned to their rural Georgetown home one September evening in 2000.

Three days later, Camm’s former State Police colleagues arrested him, and in 2002 he was convicted of the murders.

But in November 2004, the Indiana Court of Appeals overturned the decision, saying Camm didn’t receive a fair trial because jurors had been prejudiced by evidence of his numerous extra-marital affairs.

That ruling prevented the affairs from being admitted in the second trial, which ended last week in a guilty verdict, and also warned prosecutors in the next trial to tread lightly when it came to accusing Camm of molesting his daughter.

So when Floyd County Prosecutor Keith Henderson told the jury in the recent trial that Camm killed his family because his wife discovered he had molested their daughter, he opened the door for a third trial, according to defense attorney Katharine “Kitty” Liell.

In the 2004 Court of Appeals decision, the judges said while they agreed the molestation could be proof of a motive, they questioned whether the state had enough evidence to back up the claim. Camm was never charged with molestation.

Yesterday the Indianapolis Star reported, in a story by Tom Spalding headlined "Behrman grand jury starts Monday," that:
In taking over the investigation, the six-member grand jury in Martinsville will continue a probe that already has consumed thousands of hours of police work and ended in many false leads. With broad truth-seeking powers, the panel will review evidence unseen by the public and issue subpoenas to question potential suspects.

The outcome is crucial: No indictment may mean a dead end in a case already filled with twists and turns. At a minimum, experts see an opportunity to bring closure.

"Why we have chosen the road we have chosen is for lots of strategic reasons," said Morgan County Prosecutor Steve Sonnega, who declined to elaborate. "Nothing does the job like a grand jury."
Experts say the grand jury can accomplish two main tasks: Compel reluctant witnesses to talk under threat of perjury and put a fresh sets of eyes on aging evidence.

"You take it to a grand jury normally because you believe you have information sufficient to get an indictment," said Henry Karlson, a law professor at Indiana University. "Grand juries are particularly useful when there's a lot of evidence to be sifted through. You can get a lot of reaction from citizens on a purely circumstantial case." * * *

In a case such as Behrman's, the publicity it has attracted presents problems for investigators. Lang, the State Police investigator, said detectives have obtained a handful of phony jailhouse confessions from people "who were not telling us the truth to feather their own nest."

Lang believed last year he was close to seeking charges against two unidentified men, citing circumstantial evidence. Investigators had questioned the men several times and taken DNA samples from them.

[Morgan County Prosecutor Steve Sonnega] and Lang would not confirm whether there is any new information about the men or whether they will be called to appear before the grand jury.

One piece of evidence the grand jury will hear is how Behrman died. Autopsy information, normally made public, has been sealed since a December 2003 order by Morgan Superior Court Judge G. Thomas Gray. Gray last week rejected an open-records request for that information filed by the Herald-Times in Bloomington. Gray said in the order that it is "reasonably necessary for the records to remain sealed until an arrest or arrests are made in the criminal case."

A side-bar explains how a grand jury works.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on March 13, 2006 06:48 AM
Posted to Indiana Courts