Suits in triple-slaying proceeds case move ahead

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A former Indiana state trooper shouldn't be allowed to claim all $626,000 in insurance and estate proceeds from the deaths of his wife and two children 14 years ago, even though he was acquitted of their murders, attorneys representing the family members argue in civil lawsuits.

Attorneys for the parents of David Camm's late wife filed the suits and argue that some of the money should go toward the family's legal fees for attorney Nick Stein. Stein has represented Frank and Janice Renn since their daughter, Kim Renn, and grandchildren, Brad, 7, and Jill, 5, were slain in September 2000 in their southern Indiana home.

Juries convicted Camm twice on murder charges in the killings. Both convictions were overturned on appeal and Camm was acquitted last fall in the slayings following his third trial.

Camm lawyer David Mosley said during a Tuesday meeting of attorneys for the two sides in Floyd Circuit Judge Terrence Cody's chambers that the money should go to Camm alone.

The Renns and Stein "need to wake up and smell the coffee," Mosley said after Tuesday's meeting, during which three different cases related to three victims' estates were discussed, The Courier-Journal reported. Camm "was acquitted. He did not harm Kim, Brad and Jill," Mosley added.

Stein said Tuesday that if Camm was responsible for the killings, he is not eligible to receive the funds, the News and Tribune reported.

"Being acquitted doesn't mean you didn't do it, it just means that the state didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt you did," he said. "We feel he's responsible for his family's deaths or there wouldn't be any more litigation."

The civil cases involve how to distribute $167,403 held in certificates of deposit in the three estates, and $458,672 from three life insurance policies.

Two suits involving some of the benefits are pending in Cody's court while a third centered on proceeds from two policies related to Kim Camm's job at the former Aegon USA is pending in U.S. District Court in New Albany.

During a recent status conference, Federal Magistrate Judge William G. Hussman Jr. indicated that settling all of the cases together may now be best, Stein said.

He set a settlement conference for Nov. 14.

Even after the civil cases are resolved, it won't end all the litigation spawned by the case. Camm filed notice in April that he intends to sue a string of Floyd County officials for damages stemming from his wrongful convictions. He's seeking $30 million.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Especially I would like to see all the republican voting patriotic good ole boys to stop and understand that the wars they have been volunteering for all along (especially the past decade at least) have not been for God & Jesus etc no far from it unless you think George Washington's face on the US dollar is god (and we know many do). When I saw the movie about Chris Kyle, I thought wow how many Hoosiers are just like this guy, out there taking orders to do the nasty on the designated bad guys, sometimes bleeding and dying, sometimes just serving and coming home to defend a system that really just views them as reliable cannon fodder. Maybe if the Christians of the red states would stop volunteering for the imperial legions and begin collecting welfare instead of working their butts off, there would be a change in attitude from the haughty professorial overlords that tell us when democracy is allowed and when it isn't. To come home from guarding the borders of the sandbox just to hear if they want the government to protect this country's borders then they are racists and bigots. Well maybe the professorial overlords should gird their own loins for war and fight their own battles in the sandbox. We can see what kind of system this really is from lawsuits like this and we can understand who it really serves. NOT US.... I mean what are all you Hoosiers waving the flag for, the right of the president to start wars of aggression to benefit the Saudis, the right of gay marriage, the right for illegal immigrants to invade our country, and the right of the ACLU to sue over displays of Baby Jesus? The right of the 1 percenters to get richer, the right of zombie banks to use taxpayer money to stay out of bankruptcy? The right of Congress to start a pissing match that could end in WWIII in Ukraine? None of that crud benefits us. We should be like the Amish. You don't have to go far from this farcical lawsuit to find the wise ones, they're in the buggies in the streets not far away....

  2. Moreover, we all know that the well heeled ACLU has a litigation strategy of outspending their adversaries. And, with the help of the legal system well trained in secularism, on top of the genuinely and admittedly secular 1st amendment, they have the strategic high ground. Maybe Christians should begin like the Amish to withdraw their services from the state and the public and become themselves a "people who shall dwell alone" and foster their own kind and let the other individuals and money interests fight it out endlessly in court. I mean, if "the people" don't see how little the state serves their interests, putting Mammon first at nearly every turn, then maybe it is time they wake up and smell the coffee. Maybe all the displays of religiosity by American poohbahs on down the decades have been a mask of piety that concealed their own materialistic inclinations. I know a lot of patriotic Christians don't like that notion but I entertain it more and more all the time.

  3. If I were a judge (and I am not just a humble citizen) I would be inclined to make a finding that there was no real controversy and dismiss them. Do we allow a lawsuit every time someone's feelings are hurt now? It's preposterous. The 1st amendment has become a sword in the hands of those who actually want to suppress religious liberty according to their own backers' conception of how it will serve their own private interests. The state has a duty of impartiality to all citizens to spend its judicial resources wisely and flush these idiotic suits over Nativity Scenes down the toilet where they belong... however as Christians we should welcome them as they are the very sort of persecution that separates the sheep from the wolves.

  4. What about the single mothers trying to protect their children from mentally abusive grandparents who hide who they truly are behind mounds and years of medication and have mentally abused their own children to the point of one being in jail and the other was on drugs. What about trying to keep those children from being subjected to the same abuse they were as a child? I can understand in the instance about the parent losing their right and the grandparent having raised the child previously! But not all circumstances grant this being OKAY! some of us parents are trying to protect our children and yes it is our God given right to make those decisions for our children as adults!! This is not just black and white and I will fight every ounce of this to get denied

  5. Mr Smith the theory of Christian persecution in Indiana has been run by the Indiana Supreme Court and soundly rejected there is no such thing according to those who rule over us. it is a thought crime to think otherwise.