weapon and put david on th stand to say he knew he messed up i regret all of that stuff. it s so unfortunate the, disrespect that i showed m wife but then god, we don t jum from that to saying that tha automatically makes a person a murderer it s ridiculous. then the defense had to confront the ugly allegation that the five-year-old daughte had been molested. it s simply stated, though, that the bruises were th result of blunt trauma the defense argued that the bruises happened during th attack still, it was tough going. they ve got a guy who has a lot of girlfriends, there ma be evidence of child molestations, this is a very tough thing to combat, david it is, it s virtually impossible having done its best to hammer the states case for a motive, the defense turn t physical evidence. the strongest evidence, th case for david s guilt, was th blood spatter. a defense expert testified tha the blood got on the shirt ver simply, saying that when he go in the car to move his so
state police post. in this audiotape of hi first interview that night, yo can hear the interviewer handling him with kid gloves out of respect we re gonna try and find ou what happened here so that w can bring the person to justic as best we can the question or walk david through his day and his wife as far as david knew, sh followed her usual bus routine. working and then shepherding the kids around after school returning home at about 7:30 pm once the shooter, waiting fo her in the garage, or did he killer follow her in the investigators asked davi if anyone had been stalking he following her. and they wanted to know i the husband could help the understand an oddity about the crime scene. why were kim s shoes neatl placed on top of the roof of the bronco as the investigators wrapped up, and made sure david got some fresh clothing, they wer sending his blood speckled
do it. trying to get the jury wa thinking that someone was ther to molest her. the investigators never located the murder weapon. the only evidence the state ha that the gun was in his hand that night was this. barely physical droplets on th lower left hand of his t-shirt how those drops of blood got there was the crux of the case blow back this is what happens when yo shoot at close range you get that blood on you shirt. correct if you got high velocit impacts better on the t-shirt, he has to be within four fee of the child at the time that the child was killed. the prosecution believe that david camm shot fro inside the car, targeting jill in the backseat. that s how her blood sprayed o his shirt. but why? why would david camm kill hi family the reasons for those killings the prosecutor declared, was that david was a philanderin
why can t they see the stuff you know, they just turn a blind eye to the facts but the prosecutor had different set of facts we know that the defense ha maintained that this is now th killer that i should dismiss th charges against david cam. the evidence is not there. in january, 2000, six charles boney and david camm stood trial separately int different court houses while he was not accused o being the shooter, boney was found guilty on three counts o murder, in the death of kim, brad, angel kennedy. he was sentenced to 225 years. and the prosecutor tea rejected any notion that boney after the lone why? those tiny specks of blood they were on david s shirt, bu not on boney s sweatshirt. the shirt does not have hig velocity blood splatter on it. so, a former indiana stat trooper is now going to be a coconspirator with a felon that makes sense. his story is the only thin you ve got that links him to camm