ILNews

Man faces federal charge in courthouse plot

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Pike County man arrested after police discovered his plan to blow up the county courthouse now faces federal charges.

Kerry A. Thomas, of Oakland City, is charged in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, with possession of a destructive device. During a Nov. 1 search of his home, police found a PVC pipe containing a blasting cap, a cast booster, a degraded cast booster, and detonation cord. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives determined those materials constitute a destructive device as defined under federal law.

Under state law, Thomas is charged with Class A felony unlawful possession of a destructive device or explosive to kill, injure, or to destroy property; and Class C felony unlawful possession of a destructive device.

The U.S. Attorney Office also announced Thomas faces a charge of possession of unregistered machine guns. The complaint alleges that on March 16, 2009, Thomas illegally had three machine guns that weren't registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record.

Police searched Thomas' home to find evidence relating to the murder of Patrick E. King when they found the bomb-making materials. Allegedly Thomas told at least two people he planned to set a bomb off in the Pike Circuit Court courtroom to kill himself and others if he was found guilty at his trial Nov. 4.

Thomas was on trial for criminal confinement, intimidation, pointing a firearm, and battery stemming from an incident in March, according to the Pike County Clerk's Office.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT