I was really hoping that Camm would finally receive a fair trial the 3rd time around but I’m becoming increasingly concerned about Judge Dartt’s rulings as the trial progresses. There are two very critical defense objectives that are being barred from the jury.
1) Indications of prosecutorial misconduct
2) Evidence of Charles Boney’s modus operandi left at the crime scene
Why is this important?
The prosecutorial misconduct in this case is critical for the jurors to hear because had it not occurred, the investigation would have progressed in an entirely different direction and it would have progressed toward Charles Boney from the very beginning.
It all comes down to the sweatshirt found at the scene. Consider this scenario –
The sweatshirt is tested for DNA → The profile is identified → The profile is run through the DNA database (CODIS) → The profile matches Charles Boney → Boney is questioned about the murders.
The modus operandi was there.
- It was typical for Boney to leave a sweatshirt at the crime scenes as he would remove it after the crime so that people wouldn’t identify him wearing the sweatshirt.
- He had a history of assaulting women and stealing their shoes – Kim Camm’s shoes were removed and placed carefully on the Bronco, her socks/stockings were removed and never found.
- Boney arrived home that evening sweating, panting and carrying a gun.
- He had no verifiable alibi for that evening.
- We now know that his DNA was recently found on the victims’ clothing.
It would have been an easy case to prosecute. The evidence was very convincing and we know that David Camm was playing basketball at the time of the murders. David could have mourned the loss of his family with the help of his caring family. Instead he was locked up in a jail cell three days after the most unimaginable nightmare occurred.
What actually happened:
Sweatshirt from the scene was stuffed in a body bag → Investigators considered it “an artifact”, no significance to the case → Defense attorney and family members pleaded with the prosecution to test the item for DNA → The defense was told by Stan Faith that it was run through CODIS and there was NO match → Camm was prosecuted based on 4-8 tiny blood drops on his t-shirt and a lot of character assassination → 5 years later the new defense team again pushed for the DNA testing → Boney was identified in 2005 → the State takes credit for testing and identifying Charles Boney
Instead of dropping charges against Dave they instead opted to concoct a conspiracy story for Boney – one that would place him there as a witness. Boney’s distant cousin, Myron Wilkerson coerced him to put together a story that would implicate Camm and keep Boney off death row. Wilkerson was not part of the investigative team, yet he was given access to Boney. There is no doubt. Coercion of a suspect occurred. Obstruction of justice occurred.
Had the above scenario played out, had the sweatshirt been tested at the beginning, a dangerous felon and now murderer would have been off the street in 2000. Instead, the public officials of Floyd County opted to keep him free so that they could save face. No one would want to be accused of releasing a violent criminal into the community – one who would murder three innocent people three months after his release. Boney was released in 2000 after serving only 7 years of a 20 year sentence for armed robbery and kidnapping. Three months later the Camm murders occurred and everyone knows how this case has evolved. The miscarriage of justice against David Camm is clear.
Judge Dartt is making a mistake. These two factors are critical to David Camm’s defense and if he doesn’t allow the jury to hear this and David is convicted the appeals court can easily overturn it again. Please, Judge Dartt – if you are reading this, do the right thing. The jury has every right to know about everything that transpired in this investigation, including the previous prosecutions. The mishandling of evidence that occurred early on affected everything about this case. There is no denying that fact. Stan Faith was responsible for that.