Attorneys in the high-profile David Camm case in southern Indiana disagree about where to pull jurors from for a third murder
trial and whether the original prosecutor can continue on the case.
The legal teams are preparing for yet another trial for Camm, a former state trooper convicted twice for the September 2000
murders of his wife and two children. The Indiana appellate courts have overturned his murder convictions both times; the
first trial was in Floyd County and the second trial was moved to Warrick County.
In July, Special Judge Jon Dartt from Spencer Circuit Court decided not to change venue from Warrick County. But he agreed
to have jurors from outside the county, and asked both sides to present lists of places from where they’d like potential
jurors to be called. There is no common county that appears on both lists.
He hadn’t made a decision on that by Indiana Lawyer deadline. Both sides have agreed to allow most of the
hearings in Judge Dartt’s courtroom in Spencer County.
That will likely include a scheduled Sept. 24 hearing on a motion for a special prosecutor to replace Floyd County Prosecutor
Keith Henderson, who’s handled the case. The defense wants Henderson replaced because of an agreement he’d previously
made about writing a book on the Camm murders, but he said the agreement was terminated when the Indiana Supreme Court overturned
Camm’s second conviction last summer. The attorneys now disagree about whether a conflict of interest exists for him
to prosecute the case.
Rehearing "Jurors from outside region to hear case" IL Aug. 18-31, 2010
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
The court of appeals not only tries to rewrite or interpret the law to suit their fancy, now they choose play stupid as well. Every consideration must be given to pro se litigants, who are not held to the same standards as attorneys, as stated by,SCOTUS. I assume they didn't have a lawyer, since one wasn't mentioned and I strongly suggest thatb the rest of the, origional petitioners get back in there and fight for their rights.
the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.