ILNews

Hearings set for trio charged in southside Indy explosion

IL Staff
April 8, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Three people charged in an explosion that killed two people and leveled part of a southside Indianapolis housing development will go before a judge in Marion Superior Court on Wednesday.

Mark Leonard, Bob Leonard Jr., and Monserrate Shirley are charged with murder and arson for their roles in the November 2012 explosion that devastated the Richmond Hill neighborhood. Marion County Prosecutor Terry Curry is seeking life sentences without parole for the three suspects.

The three suspects are scheduled to appear before Judge Sheila A. Carlisle at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday in Marion Superior Court Criminal Division 3.

Mark Leonard, along with his brother Bob Leonard Jr., and Mark Leonard’s girlfriend Monserrate Shirley, were arrested in December and charged with two counts of murder and multiple counts of arson. Authorities say the three defendants rigged Shirley’s residence at 8349 Fieldfare Way to fill with natural gas then explode and burn in order to collect insurance money.

But the explosion was massive, and the resulting fire spread to John and Jennifer Longworths’ home next door, causing their deaths. More than 30 homes were destroyed or seriously damaged in the explosion, and at least seven people in the neighborhood were injured.

While awaiting trial in jail, Mark Leonard also was charged last month with conspiracy to commit murder. The prosecutor’s office said he tried to arrange with an inmate a murder-for-hire plan to kill a potential witness. 

Shirley also faces a count of insurance fraud for filing a claim two days after the house explosion stating that the fire was an accident.







 

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. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

  2. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  3. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  4. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  5. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

ADVERTISEMENT