A Greensburg woman – who said she was wrongfully convicted 14 years ago of an arson that killed her son – has
lost her latest bid for a new trial and is now taking her case to the Indiana Court of Appeals.
After months of review following a hearing in October, Decatur Circuit Judge John Westhafer issued a 47-page ruling earlier
this summer that denied Kristine Bunch’s request for post-conviction relief. She was convicted in 1996 of arson and
murder for setting the trailer-home fire the year before that resulted in the death of her 3-year-old son. She was sentenced
to 60 years in prison.
In his June 8 decision, Judge Westhafer wrote that he didn’t feel the defense produced sufficient evidence to warrant
a retrial. He noted that Bunch’s lawyers had not introduced or presented any new factual evidence or physical evidence
discovered since the original 1996 trial, but rather only opinion evidence. One of his main reasons for denial was that the
lawyers presented four experts about how a new trial would turn out, but those individuals cited the same “undetermined”
cause as the defense’s original trial expert.
“While (Bunch) had new resources available to her at the post-conviction hearing, new experts do not create new evidence,”
the judge wrote. “The issues raised and the conclusions reached – while packaged differently – remain
basically the same as they were at trial in 1996.”
Judge Westhafer also discussed the investigation quality, existence of kerosene in the floor samples with ‘innocent’
explanations, and a potential electrical cause were all presented at the original trial and in subsequent appeals. He also
referred to Bunch’s own trial comments that appear contradictory and create “a significant inference of guilt.”
Bunch’s legal team – Indianapolis attorney Hilary Bowe Ricks and the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern
University School of Law – filed an appeal July 8 and briefs are being filed in the coming months. That appeal is Kristine
Bunch v. State of Indiana, No. 16A05-1007-PC-00439.
Rehearing to "Aiming for exoneration" IL Sept. 2-15, 2009
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
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.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!
So, if I save $100.00 cash per week, from my $500.00 per week paycheck, for 50 years, at which time, I will have saved $260,000.00, the government can raid my home and take my money, just by saying it is drug money! Shouldn't the government, have some kind of evidence of drugs, rather, than just saying we are the government and we will take anything you own, anytime we choose? Tyranny is upon us! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any!