IN - Kimberly Camm, 35, & 2 children murdered, Georgetown, 28 Sept 2000 *2 earlier trials OVERTURNED
- Thread starter smellsarat
- Start date
From this blog post: http://www.wdrb.com/story/23418567/david-camm-blog-jailhouse-informants
Niemeyer said he found 1,950 brass particles on Camm's shorts.
"When I saw the quantity of brass particles pulled from the shorts, I was quite surprised," Niemeyer said, adding that he had not seen that many pulled from clothing before. He said it could have been caused by, "handling cartridge cases or loading a clip loading a gun."
As for the brass, Uliana pointed out that brass particles can be found on doorknobs, plumbing fixtures and other household items. Niemeyer agreed, but noted, "this is the first time I've run into that many particles from one tape lift."
Niemeyer went on to explain his theory: that because the brass particles were so small, the abrasions creating them had to be very light. He said he believes whoever was wearing the shirt was rubbing brass cartridges the type used in a gun together in his hand.
He said that, for him, this was the "most likely scenario."
I had not heard about the brass particles before! I wonder if it is possible to compare the brass particles on Camm's shorts with the bullets and casings/cartridges found at the murder scene. Would there be any way to tell if the brass particles came from those bullets? Has Camm ever mentioned working on plumbing or a doorknob earlier in the day?
Niemeyer said he found 1,950 brass particles on Camm's shorts.
"When I saw the quantity of brass particles pulled from the shorts, I was quite surprised," Niemeyer said, adding that he had not seen that many pulled from clothing before. He said it could have been caused by, "handling cartridge cases or loading a clip loading a gun."
As for the brass, Uliana pointed out that brass particles can be found on doorknobs, plumbing fixtures and other household items. Niemeyer agreed, but noted, "this is the first time I've run into that many particles from one tape lift."
Niemeyer went on to explain his theory: that because the brass particles were so small, the abrasions creating them had to be very light. He said he believes whoever was wearing the shirt was rubbing brass cartridges the type used in a gun together in his hand.
He said that, for him, this was the "most likely scenario."
I had not heard about the brass particles before! I wonder if it is possible to compare the brass particles on Camm's shorts with the bullets and casings/cartridges found at the murder scene. Would there be any way to tell if the brass particles came from those bullets? Has Camm ever mentioned working on plumbing or a doorknob earlier in the day?
I just thought of something and wanted to run it by other sleuthers.
I got a small paper cut on my hand earlier today. I didn't really pay attention to it until an hour or so later when I looked down and saw it had been bleeding. A small drop of blood formed on one end of the cut and it was already drying/gelling and the drop was drier on top (if that makes sense). It didn't come off when I gently wiped over it with a Kleenex.
The defense is saying the 8 tiny spots of blood on Camm's shirt came from the shirt rubbing on Jill's hair when Camm leaned over her to get to Brad. Wouldn't the blood have already been drying/gelling by the time Camm got home? So, for the blood to transfer to Camm's shirt, he would have had to have leaned heavily on Jill's hair - but at the same time, I would think that doing so would have led to larger blood spots or smeared spots even just more spots.
Wouldn't the blood have had to have been very wet/liquidy still for it to have transferred so easily to Camm's shirt?
I know that there could have been microscopic droplets of blood in Jill's hair that could be why the spots are so small, but wouldn't those have been dry already by the time Camm arrived home? (Given that the smaller the size of a liquid, the more quickly it will dry. The blood along my paper cut was already dry, except for the blood in the drop that had formed on one end of the cut.)
Does that make any sense? Am I missing something? It's been a while since I had AP Biology in high school. :blushing:
I got a small paper cut on my hand earlier today. I didn't really pay attention to it until an hour or so later when I looked down and saw it had been bleeding. A small drop of blood formed on one end of the cut and it was already drying/gelling and the drop was drier on top (if that makes sense). It didn't come off when I gently wiped over it with a Kleenex.
The defense is saying the 8 tiny spots of blood on Camm's shirt came from the shirt rubbing on Jill's hair when Camm leaned over her to get to Brad. Wouldn't the blood have already been drying/gelling by the time Camm got home? So, for the blood to transfer to Camm's shirt, he would have had to have leaned heavily on Jill's hair - but at the same time, I would think that doing so would have led to larger blood spots or smeared spots even just more spots.
Wouldn't the blood have had to have been very wet/liquidy still for it to have transferred so easily to Camm's shirt?
I know that there could have been microscopic droplets of blood in Jill's hair that could be why the spots are so small, but wouldn't those have been dry already by the time Camm arrived home? (Given that the smaller the size of a liquid, the more quickly it will dry. The blood along my paper cut was already dry, except for the blood in the drop that had formed on one end of the cut.)
Does that make any sense? Am I missing something? It's been a while since I had AP Biology in high school. :blushing:
I just thought of something and wanted to run it by other sleuthers.
I got a small paper cut on my hand earlier today. I didn't really pay attention to it until an hour or so later when I looked down and saw it had been bleeding. A small drop of blood formed on one end of the cut and it was already drying/gelling and was drier on top (if that makes sense). It didn't come off when I gently wiped over it with a Kleenex.
The defense is saying the 8 tiny spots of blood on Camm's shirt came from the shirt rubbing on Jill's hair when Camm leaned over her to get to Brad. Wouldn't the blood have already been drying/gelling by the time Camm got home? So, for the blood to transfer to Camm's shirt, he would have had to have leaned heavily on Jill's hair - but at the same time, I would think that doing so would have led to larger blood spots or smeared spots even just more spots.
Wouldn't the blood have had to have been very wet/liquidy still for it to have transferred so easily to Camm's shirt?
I know that there could have been microscopic droplets of blood in Jill's hair that could be why the spots are so small, but wouldn't those have been dry already by the time Camm arrived home? (Given that the smaller the size of a liquid, the more quickly it will dry. The blood along my paper cut was already dry, except for the blood in the drop that had formed on one end of the cut.)
Does that make any sense? Am I missing something? It's been a while since I had AP Biology in high school. :blushing:
I got a small paper cut on my hand earlier today. I didn't really pay attention to it until an hour or so later when I looked down and saw it had been bleeding. A small drop of blood formed on one end of the cut and it was already drying/gelling and was drier on top (if that makes sense). It didn't come off when I gently wiped over it with a Kleenex.
The defense is saying the 8 tiny spots of blood on Camm's shirt came from the shirt rubbing on Jill's hair when Camm leaned over her to get to Brad. Wouldn't the blood have already been drying/gelling by the time Camm got home? So, for the blood to transfer to Camm's shirt, he would have had to have leaned heavily on Jill's hair - but at the same time, I would think that doing so would have led to larger blood spots or smeared spots even just more spots.
Wouldn't the blood have had to have been very wet/liquidy still for it to have transferred so easily to Camm's shirt?
I know that there could have been microscopic droplets of blood in Jill's hair that could be why the spots are so small, but wouldn't those have been dry already by the time Camm arrived home? (Given that the smaller the size of a liquid, the more quickly it will dry. The blood along my paper cut was already dry, except for the blood in the drop that had formed on one end of the cut.)
Does that make any sense? Am I missing something? It's been a while since I had AP Biology in high school. :blushing:
Boneys ex girlfriend has once again testified to the fact that she never saw Boney wearing sports shoes, and as far as she knew he never played basketball, which is where Boney says he met Camm,
plus the note that has now been found that she wrote over a decade ago provided the information that Camm had a photograph of a woman called Kimberley
plus the note that has now been found that she wrote over a decade ago provided the information that Camm had a photograph of a woman called Kimberley
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
I thought it was Boney who had the picture.
only just noticed my typo, I imagine Camm had loads of pictures of his wife and kids,
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
The jury in the David Camm case on Thursday heard testimony that an Indiana State Police detective and distant relative of Charles Boney took Kim Camm's cell phone out of the evidence room and kept it for two months, returning it fingerprint-free.
http://www.wdrb.com/story/23475593/prosecution-ready-to-rest-its-case-in-camm-trial
http://www.wdrb.com/story/23475593/prosecution-ready-to-rest-its-case-in-camm-trial
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
http://www.courier-journal.com/arti...T-shirt-caused-by-contact-defense-expert-says
Blood spatter expert Barton Epstein testified Wednesday that he found no inconsistencies between statements David Camm made to investigators and the physical evidence found at the scene where his family was murdered.
Blood spatter expert Barton Epstein testified Wednesday that he found no inconsistencies between statements David Camm made to investigators and the physical evidence found at the scene where his family was murdered.
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
http://www.courier-journal.com/arti...murder-trials?odyssey=obinsite&nclick_check=1
The first witness called Tuesday by David Camms attorneys in his third murder trial was an Oregon man who testified in previous trials as an expert for the prosecution.
This time Robert Rob Stites, a former police officer who was hired by forensic blood expert Rod Englert to take photos and notes at the scene, admitted that he incorrectly told ealier jurors that he was a blood stain pattern analyst.
Sorry, this should have been posted before the one before it.
Interesting testimony of the original "blood spatter expert".
The first witness called Tuesday by David Camms attorneys in his third murder trial was an Oregon man who testified in previous trials as an expert for the prosecution.
This time Robert Rob Stites, a former police officer who was hired by forensic blood expert Rod Englert to take photos and notes at the scene, admitted that he incorrectly told ealier jurors that he was a blood stain pattern analyst.
Sorry, this should have been posted before the one before it.
Interesting testimony of the original "blood spatter expert".
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20130929/NEWS02/309290054/
Midway through David Camm’s third murder trial, Floyd County officials are fretting about the estimated $1.1 million it will cost a community already struggling with depleted county coffers.
“We’re in dire straits,” said Dana Fendley, vice president of the Floyd County Council, who added that officials may have to arrange a loan to avoid sinking into the red before the year ends.
In all, the county’s tally for all Camm-related trials and expenses since 2000 will exceed $4.4 million by the end of 2013, based on an analysis of records and estimates of final trial expenses calculated by county Auditor Scott Clark.
Midway through David Camm’s third murder trial, Floyd County officials are fretting about the estimated $1.1 million it will cost a community already struggling with depleted county coffers.
“We’re in dire straits,” said Dana Fendley, vice president of the Floyd County Council, who added that officials may have to arrange a loan to avoid sinking into the red before the year ends.
In all, the county’s tally for all Camm-related trials and expenses since 2000 will exceed $4.4 million by the end of 2013, based on an analysis of records and estimates of final trial expenses calculated by county Auditor Scott Clark.
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
http://www.courier-journal.com/arti...rial-blood-spatter-analysis-has-50-error-rate
A forensic biologist testified in David Camm’s murder trial Thursday that there is a 50 percent error rate in deciding whether the blood stains on Camm’s T-shirt and shoes were caused by gunshot spatter or incidental contact.
A forensic biologist testified in David Camm’s murder trial Thursday that there is a 50 percent error rate in deciding whether the blood stains on Camm’s T-shirt and shoes were caused by gunshot spatter or incidental contact.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,092
This case baffles me simply because I don't understand why this Boney guy (if he acted alone) would kill 2 little kids as well as the mom, in the garage, 2 of them in the car. It makes no sense to me. Was there a burglary? Why in the garage? That implies Kim & kids were just getting home and were attacked before they could have seen anything going on (inside the house, for instance).
Who most benefits when a wife and kids are killed?
I've also never been able to get past the M.E.'s findings of sexual abuse on the 5 yr old girl. That wasn't from/by Boney, IIRC.
Who most benefits when a wife and kids are killed?
I've also never been able to get past the M.E.'s findings of sexual abuse on the 5 yr old girl. That wasn't from/by Boney, IIRC.
Boney is a classic predator. If there was in fact sexual abuse of Jill why could it not have been from Boney?
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 11,556
- Reaction score
- 20,092
I thought Jill was still strapped into her car seat? It doesn't seem like more than a minute passed between the car pulling into the garage and all 3 being shot. Just long enough for the mom to exit out of the car. Both kids were still in their seats, right?
Was Boney a classic child predator? Serial Killer? I don't know his background. Had he murdered women & kids before?
Also if there was any evidence of prior abuse (and I'm not saying there was as I didn't see or read the M.E's report or hear her testimony) it wouldn't be Boney for any prior incidents.
ohiogirl
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 4,973
- Reaction score
- 53
http://www.wthr.com/story/23260141/2013/08/26/molestation-testimony-not-allowed-at-david-camm-trial
The judge ruled that the jury could not hear testimony relating to the alleged molestation, calling the claim speculation without enough evidence to support it.
Similar threads
