ILNews

Camm seeking damages for wrongful incarceration

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

David Camm, the former Indiana State Police officer who served 13 years in prison before being acquitted of murdering his wife and two young children, is striking back at those who accused him.

He has filed a tort claim against Floyd County and some Floyd County officials, seeking $30 million in compensation. Another tort claim will be filed before July 21 and include Indiana state employees, according to Camm’s attorney, Garry Adams, partner at the Louisville law firm of Clay Daniel Walton Adams PLC.

“From the information I have reviewed, it is probably the biggest travesty of justice I have seen,” Adams said of Camm’s situation.

After he discovered his family shot in their Floyd County garage in 2000, Camm was arrested and charged with murder. He was convicted in two separate trials but both verdicts were overturned. At his third trial in the fall of 2013, the jury in Boone County found Camm not guilty.

Adams said the formal complaint will be filed in federal court before Oct. 24, 2014 – one year from the day Camm was acquitted. A team of attorneys from Adams firm will be working on drafting a “very complete complaint.”

“It’s always difficult when you go up against state actors in a 1983 claim,” Adams said.

Any dollar amount that Camm may be awarded will be determined by the jury. However, Adams said the $30 million figure includes compensation for lost wages, mental anguish and wrongful incarceration.   

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT