News and Tribune

August 16, 2013

Camm jury selection continues

Witness list in accused’s third murder trial tops 100 people

By ROD ROSE
CNHI News Service

LEBANON — Nearly half of the 80 seats in Boone County Circuit Court held prospective

jurors Friday morning for the fifth day of jury selection in David Camm’s murder trial. Another 12 people sat in the jury box.

Camm is accused of shooting and killing his wife and two children at their Georgetown home on Sept. 28, 2000. He has twice been convicted, and twice those convictions have been overturned on appeal. His third trial was moved to Boone County — 25 miles northwest of Indianapolis — because of extensive publicity in Southern Indiana.

More than 100 witnesses could be called by both sides during the trial, Special Judge Jonathan Dartt told the jurors before lawyers began questioning them.

Among those queries were whether jurors could “sit in judgment” of someone; how they perceived the difference between “reasonable doubt” and “any doubt;” and if they would be disturbed when examining graphic evidence.

Both sides are trying to chose, from a pool of 150 people, 12 jurors and seven alternates whom they think will believe their version of what happened. Each side may excuse up to 20 jurors.

After Dartt read the list of possible witnesses — 54 for the prosecution, 52 for the defense, with some of them duplicates — he asked if any jurors knew or were related to any of those witnesses.

A woman stood and said she thought it was possible; her father was from Illinois, and his family “was huge,” she said.

Special Prosecutor Stan Levco began his juror interviews about 9:55 a.m.

Did the jurors understand the difference between “reasonable” doubt and “any” doubt, he asked.

Some did.

“I think you have to follow the orders,” one said.

Others were less certain.

One juror hesitated after Levco asked, “If I prove it to you beyond a reasonable doubt, what would your verdict be?”

“Could you repeat the question?” she asked.

Two prospective jurors said they would not be able to look at what Levco called “gruesome” evidence, including photographs of the scene.

Levco may have hinted at a possible line of testimony when he asked whether jurors would give more weight to one side if it produced more expert witnesses than the other.

The defense has won permission to introduce DNA evidence using a technique unavailable at Camm’s other trials. The prosecution would attempt to discredit that testimony.

Camm is represented by Richard Kammen, who was appointed to the defense team after lead attorney Katharine Liell withdrew in January 2010, citing business and personal issues. Stacy Uliana, who assisted Liell, remains on the defense team.

Read the News and Tribune and newsandtribune.com for updates throughout the trial, which is expected to take two months.