STORY: "Camm trial 9/10: Defence finds inconsistencies but can't touch Boney's past," by reporter Gordon Boyd, published by WAVE 3 News on September 10, 2013.
GIST: "Indiana's Rules of Evidence and court orders prevented David Camm's defense team from using Charles Boney's criminal history against him after he'd claimed to have heard Camm fire the shots that killed his wife Kim, and their young children on September 28, 2000. The only hope to open that door would be by prompting Boney himself to turn the knob. Tuesday, Richard Kammen, the lead defense counsel, tried repeatedly to do that. But whenever Boney got close, prosecutors would keep the door shut by calling for conferences with Special Judge Jon Dartt. After those conferences ended, Kammen would shift gears.........The court also heard from Kathleen Boone, an ISP trace analyst, who told jurors that fibers taken from Boney's sweatshirt were similar to those pulled from the carpet in the Camm's master bedroom. However, Boone said she could not pronounce them identical. A match could have discredited Boney's claim that he never entered Camm's house. Likewise, Richard Hammer, a state police investigative supervisor testified that one of Camm's gym shoes could have made a bloody partial print that was found in the garage. Hammer said he was unable to confirm enough individual characteristics to call it an exact match. First up Wednesday will be Rod Englert, a blood pattern analyst, who offered what prosecutors termed an illustration of the difference between transfer and high velocity stains. Prosecutors have identified several dots of Jill Camm's blood on David Camm's t-shirt as high velocity back spatter. Prosecutors said that is proof that Camm was the shooter. Englert placed stage blood in an eye-dropper, onto a hairpiece, and into an atomizer bottle to assert that the patterns each left would indicate how they were left. "Sometimes (High Impact Spatter) is a mist," Englert testified. "Sometimes it will be almost too small to see." "It's an impressive show, but it has no relevance," Kammen argued before Dartt ruled to allow the testimony. "Some appellate court is going to call this for what it is; non-scientific junk science.""
The entire story can be found at:
http://www.wave3.com/story/23395758/camm-trial-910-boney-undergoes-cross-examination
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.
Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com
