Sept. 17, 2013
LEBANON, Ind. (WDRB) – On Tuesday morning, you might say David Camm had problems with an ex-girlfriend. But it wasn't his ex-girlfriend. It was Charles Boney's.
Today, Mala Singh Mattingly, Boney's girlfriend at the time of the murders, took the stand to testify about what she saw on Sept. 28, 2000. She was supposed to testify last Thursday, but the defense managed to stall that testimony after a 5-10 page document, handwritten by Mattingly in 2005, was uncovered. Mattingly said the document was written when she was first confronted by investigators in the U.S. In it, the defense found what it called "potential bombshell" information, and requested that Mattingly's testimony be delayed until Tuesday morning so they could revise their questioning.
This morning, before the jury was brought in, we learned what that information was.
Court was gaveled into session at 9:03 a.m. and, before the jury was brought in, the attorneys on both sides spoke to Judge Jonathan Dartt about Mattingly's impending testimony.
Defense attorney Richard Kammen immediately brought up Mattingly's handwritten document and blasted Floyd County Prosecutor Keith Henderson – the prosecutor on Camm's second trial – for not producing it years ago.
Kammen said that "the defense was given a short time" to revise its questioning of Mattingly based on this new information.
"Had we known of this," he said, indicating the handwritten note, "we would have done any number of things differently."
He said the letter contained evidence that was "quite exculpatory to Mr. Camm," while also being "quite inculpatory" to Charles Boney.
Specifically, Kammen said Mattingly's note references a photograph.
"She suggests that Mr. Boney has a photograph of a woman that she knows as Kimberly," Kammen said.
Kammen said there would be no innocent explanation if that photograph was a picture of Kim Camm – and that he suspected Boney may have stolen the photograph from the Camm residence after committing the murders.
The defense argued that they would have asked Boney about this photograph while he was on the stand, had they been aware of the note before now.
The only "real remedy," Kammen said, was a mistrial, as well as, "a prohibition of any future trials…based on the failure of the state" to produce the evidence.
"Mr. Henderson failed to do it," Kammen said. "He failed to disclose it to these prosecutors," whom Kammen said were "blindsided" by this new evidence.
Boone County Prosecutor Todd Meyer had a much different take.
"We've reviewed this material," he said. "We don't believe that that material is exculpatory."
"Whether or not they were disclosed previously…we can't necessarily speak to that," Meyer added.
He also criticized the defense for not questioning Mattingly more intensively than they did.
"Ms. Mattingly has been available to the defense since Thursday," he said. "I think that would have been the proper remedy…that opportunity wasn't taken."
Meyer pointed out that Mattingly doesn't know what Kim Camm looks like, and that there is evidence that suggests that the picture may have been of Boney's ex-wife.
"The state doesn't believe this rises anywhere near the level of a mistrial," Meyer said.
Kammen noted out that Boney's ex-wife wasn't named Kimberly, and added that what Mattingly has to say would be "devastating" to Charles Boney. But Meyer held his ground.
"The state believes that a motion for a mistrial on these grounds is inappropriate," he said.
For his part, Judge Dartt told the defense that he would take their motion for a mistrial "under advisement," and opened the door to the possibility that Charles Boney might take the stand again.
"I would definitely give you leeway to recall him," he told the defense.
Moments later, the jury was called into the courtroom and Mala Singh Mattingly took the stand.
Witness: Mala Singh Mattingly
Charles Boney's girlfriend at the time of the murders
Mala Singh Mattingly, an olive-skinned woman who hails from Trinidad, walked into the courtroom wearing a watercolor, floral blouse, long earrings and a white necklace. Speaking with a thick accent, she explained why she was there.
"I am a witness for the state of Indiana," she said.
Under questioning from Meyer, she told the jury that she traveled to the United States with her two children in order to testify in this trial. She said the reason her two children traveled with her was because she could find no one in Trinidad suitable to watch them for her.
She said she had been to the U.S. earlier, at age 14, on a student visa.
"I came with my Mom," she said.
Meyer asked if she returned to her home country after the student visa expired.
"No I did not," she said. "I went to live at my uncle's…he lives in Louisville, Ky."
Mattingly testified that her uncle ran a fast food restaurant, and she soon became one of his employees. It was under these circumstances when she would meet Charles Boney, sometime around June or July 2000.
"He came into my uncle's restaurant," she said. "I was 19."
Mattingly said she began a romantic relationship with Boney that ran from July 2000 to the end of September 2000, with her occasionally staying at the home that Boney and his mother shared.
Meyer asked her what kind of car Boney drove.
"I can't remember," she said. "A Cadillac…something like that."
Was Charles Boney employed at the time?
"Yes, at a wood factory," Mattingly said. "I can't remember the name of it."
Meyer then guided Mattingly through the events of Sept. 28, 2000 – the night of the murders.
"He was supposed to go to work that night," Mattingly said, adding that Boney would typically leave home at about 6 p.m.
Mattingly recalled Boney saying something that night before he left.
"He just said he was going to go meet a buddy," she said, adding a moment later that, "He always talked about his buddies."
She testified that she stayed home and watched television, going to bed sometime later. It was after midnight when, Mattingly said, Boney woke her up.
"He was breathing really hard – excited somewhat," Mattingly said.
Boney, Mattingly testified, opened up a jersey to reveal a gun inside. She said she had never seen the gun before.
"I seen them in TV shows," she said. "Television shows."
Mattingly was then shown a photograph of a gun and verified it as the type of gun Boney showed her, "because it had the round little piece."
Meyer asked her if Boney had any injuries when she saw him.
"Yes, he had a scraped knee," she said. "There was probably a little blood on it."
For her part, Mattingly said she didn't want to have anything to do with the gun, adding that she was "very scared."
"I told him, 'Go put it away,'" she said. "Get it out of the house. Carry it outside and put it away."
The next morning, Mattingly said, Boney called her and his mother to sit next to him and view the news coverage of murders that had taken place overnight.
"He wanted us to watch the television," she said.
Mattingly told the jury that at that point, Boney and his mother got into an argument. Mattingly then took a shower, and according to her testimony, both were gone when she got out.
"When I saw there was no one there, I called my friend and asked her to come pick me up," Mattingly said, adding that she had to "get out of there."
She said she left the home and returned to her apartment on Cane Run Road in Louisville. She testified that she saw Boney one more time, two weeks later.
"I told him never to come back," Mattingly said. "This was one relationship that didn't need to happen."
Then Meyer pointed out that Mattingly's DNA had been found on the grey sweatshirt – ultimately traced to Charles Boney – that had been found at the murder scene. Did she know how?
"I'm a diabetic and I have to test myself, so blood could have gotten on the sweatshirt that way," she said.
Did she have any involvement in the murders of the Camm family members?
"No," Mattingly told Meyer.
Moments later, defense attorney Stacy Uliana rose to cross-examine Mattingly.
"You obviously are aware that your blood is on Charles Boney's grey sweatshirt?" Uliana asked.
"Yes," Mattingly replied.
Did she know that her DNA is also mixed with the DNA of Bradley Camm on the shirt?
"I don't know," she said.
And that her DNA is mixed with the DNA of Kim Camm's on the shirt?
"No," she said.
"And your story has not always been what it is today, has it?" Uliana asked.
"Yes, it's been the same," Mattingly replied.
Uliana pointed out that on April 1, 2005, Mattingly talked to police investigators by phone and told them three times that she never saw Charles Boney with a gun. Mattingly admitted that this was true.
Had she ever been to the Camm residence?
"I don't know where the Camm residence is," Mattingly said.
Uliana noted that Mattingly had no "alibi witnesses" who could vouch for the time she said she had been watching TV and sleeping on the night of Sept. 28, 2000.
"I don't know how to answer that," Mattingly said.
The only ones who had ever questioned whether Mattingly had ever had any involvement in the murders themselves had been Camm's defense team, Uliana said, pointing out that "rather than interrogate you," investigators allowed her to write out her recollections on a handwritten document, which she ended with a request to become an American citizen.
Uliana then brought up Mattingly's supposed "multiple explanations" for how her blood got on Boney's sweatshirt. Initially, Uliana said, Mattingly told police that she never wore Boney's sweatshirt. After her DNA was found on the sweatshirt, Uliana said Mattingly told them she may have slept in it. When one of Camm's defense attorneys told her a significant amount of her blood was on the shirt, Uliana said Mattingly told them it may have been from her menstrual cycle – later, that she and Boney engaged in sexual relations while she was in her menstrual cycle.
Today, Uliana pointed out, Mattingly was testifying that her blood was on the shirt because she was a diabetic.
"Are you lying?" Uliana asked.
"No I'm not!" Mattingly said.
"Ms. Mattingly, there's one part of your story you left out," Uliana said. "Charles Boney wrote you a check for $99, right?"
"I can't remember," Mattingly said.
Uliana then presented Mattingly with what Uliana claimed was the check from Boney.
"I can't remember what his handwriting looks like, but it's here," she said.
Why didn't she call the police after the incident with the gun?
"It never occurred to me to go to the police," Mattingly said.
Uliana then walked Mattingly through several phone calls and meetings she had with police investigators after Charles Boney was identified – including a phone call in which she was confronted by investigators about her DNA on the grey sweatshirt.
"And you know, it's unfortunate, because I don't think this call was ever recorded," Uliana said.
"Are you serious?" Mattingly replied.
Uliana then asked Mattingly another surprising question: Did Charles Boney ask her to get a gun for him in September 2000?
"There was a time when he asked me that, yes," she replied.
Under Uliana's questioning, Mattingly revealed other facts about Charles Boney: He never played basketball. He always carried a backpack around – one that Mattingly was never allowed to open. He was "very secretive" and didn't, to Mattingly's knowledge, own a pair of tennis shoes.
Uliana asked Mattingly if it was true that Boney took four or five showers a day.
"He took a lot," she said.
A few moments later, some of the jurors submitted questions for Mala Singh Mattingly. Below is a partial list of those questions. Both the questions and the answers have been paraphrased.
QUESTION: Why did Charles Boney want you to get him a gun?
ANSWER: "I don't know why. I honestly don't know why."
QUESTION: If you dislike guns so much, why didn't you leave then?
ANSWER: "It wasn't long after [that] I left. When he came in the room and showed me, that's when I left."
QUESTION: Were you on blood thinners in Sept. 2000?
ANSWER: Mattingly replied that she didn't know what blood thinners were. She then went on to list several medications she was on at the time.
QUESTION: Did Charles Boney ever use his car to transport dirty laundry to places other than his mother's?
ANSWER: Mattingly told the jury she didn't know, and she wasn't allowed to look inside Boney's backpack, "because he was so private."
Moments later, Mattingly was excused.
Witness: Darrell Gibson
Indiana State Police Detective
Currently on disability
Moments later, Darrell Gibson, an Indiana State Police detective on disability was sworn in and began testimony.
A barrel-chested man with a bald spot and a deep voice, Gibson had already been seen by the jury in a video interrogation of Camm played for the jurors a couple of weeks ago.
Gibson testified that he met Camm at the Indiana State Police Sellersburg post in 1993.
"I considered us friends," Gibson said.
Gibson testified that he met Camm at a local hospital on Saturday, Sept. 30, 2000 – just two days after the murders.
"The purpose for Mr. Camm to be at the hospital was to perform a sexual assault kit," he said, describing a process by which samples of Camm's fluid and hair would be taken.
At one point, Gibson said, a sample of Camm's pubic hair was taken. That's when, Gibson said, Camm made an inappropriate comment. Gibson said Camm told him, "If he knew he was going to do this, he would have used conditioner."
A female nurse was present at the time, according to Gibson.
Gibson also said Camm told him that, "If the evidence gathered came back on him, he was going to come after myself and Detective Clemmons."
"I did not take it as a threat," Gibson said, adding that he felt the comment was made jokingly.
Camm also said, "This is what you have to do when you kill your wife and kids," according to Gibson.
"I did not take it as a confession," Gibson testified.
Gibson added that Camm told them, "His wife was looking down from heaven, shaking her head that he has to do this."
Gibson testified that he had another meeting with Camm – this one at Camm's request in October 2000 at the Floyd County jail. He said Camm was advised of his rights and told him he didn't want the meeting to be recorded.
"His words, he just wanted to sit down and talk, man-to-man," Gibson said.
"The conversation probably didn't last more than 20 minutes," Gibson said, adding that it was "more of a fact-finding mission for him."
Gibson testified that Camm asked him about high-velocity blood spatter, wanting to know what it was and how long it took to dry.
"First he responded that it could not be high-velocity blood spatter," Gibson said. Then, when told it only took 20 seconds for the blood to dry, Gibson said Camm told him he must have arrived at the murder scene just in time to get the spatter on him.
"Did he talk to you about the blood separation?" Prosecutor Stan Levco asked, referencing the 26-foot-long blood trail from Kim Camm's head.
"Yes he did," Gibson replied. "He made the comment that the amount of time it took for the blood to separate would show that he wasn't there."
Gibson testified that at the time, Camm had two notepads containing sketches and notes. He said Camm also gave him a list of about eight names of possible suspects to check out. None of them, Gibson said, were found to be tied to the murders.
Defense attorney Stacy Uliana rose to question Gibson moments later.
Uliana pointed out that in the two weeks following the murders, Gibson spoke with Camm four times, and each time he always answered all questions, consented to all searches and continued to maintain his innocence.
"He even gave you his clothes," she said.
"Yes ma'am," Gibson replied.
She then changed the subject.
"Would you admit that random violence does occur?" she asked.
"If you're asking if random violence occurs between strangers, then yes," Gibson replied.
Uliana then referenced the list of names Camm gave Gibson.
"But what isn't on that list is Charles Boney," Uliana said.
"Correct, ma'am," Gibson replied.
In an effort to explain Camm's inappropriate comments, Uliana focused on Camm's possible emotional state when providing the samples for the sexual assault kit.
"This had to be, at least for David, a stressful thing, would you agree to that?" she asked.
"Possibly," Gibson said.
She later asked Gibson if she saw any injuries on Camm when he was stripping.
"I do not recall seeing any bruises or scratches," Gibson said.
Just before Gibson left the stand, one of the jurors asked if he knew why David Camm left the Indiana State Police four months prior to the murders.
"What I know is he left because he received another job opportunity," Gibson replied. "That's my opinion."
Witness: Ernest Victor Nugent
Unemployed resident of Corydon, Ind.
A short time after lunch, the jury heard testimony from Ernest Nugent, a scraggly grey haired man with a beard.
Nugent testified that he is an unemployed resident of Corydon, Ind., but in Sept. 2000, he worked at Anderson Wood, alongside Charles Boney.
"They just make wood parts for different furniture and stuff," he said of his former employer.
Boone County Prosecutor Todd Meyer asked if he was familiar with semi-automatic handguns.
"Not to well," Nugent said.
He testified that sometime around August or September 2000, he had a conversation with Charles Boney about selling him a gun – but he didn't sell him the gun until November or December 2000. That would have been months after the murders.
"I've always said that," he replied.
Under cross examination, he said he did not sell Boney a Lorcin .380. He also testified that he was not a major gun dealer, did not have a gun showcase and had never sold Boney a gun in the parking lot of the 4H Fairgrounds.
He was excused from the stand a short time later.
Witness: Tom Bevel
President of Bevel, Gardner & Associates
Blood Stain Pattern Expert
The prosecution's last witness of the day caused so much controversy among the defense team that the jury had to leave the room after only a few minutes of testimony.
Tom Bevel, a balding man with thin, grayish black hair, explained to the jury that he was president of Bevel, Gardner & Associates, a firm that focuses on forensic education, case analysis and online proficiency training in the area of blood stain pattern analysis.
He testified that he'd had one year of college before he was one of the "lucky people" to get drafted for Vietnam. After his tour, he came home and began working for the Oklahoma City Police Department, eventually obtaining his Bachelor's and Master's degrees.
He was first asked to analyze the David Camm case on Aug. 6, 2001, when he was contacted by the District Attorney's Office in New Albany. He said he was asked to look at pictures of the crime scene and examine the physical evidence in the case, focusing specifically on blood stain patterns.
On Oct. 18, 2001, he said he rendered an opinion.
Special Prosecutor Stan Levco then showed Bevel a photograph of Jill Camm's body, slumped over her seat belt.
Moments later, the attorneys approached Judge Dartt's bench and began whispering. Immediately, the judge called a recess and the jury was escorted out.
Away from the jury…
After the jury left, defense attorney Richard Kammen expressed his opposition to some of the evidence Bevel was expected to bring.
Specifically, Kammen objected to the photograph of Jill's body, which included arrows pointing to locations where Bevel claimed he found blood stains. Kammen said Bevel claimed there was blood on the window – and that this was a "new opinion" the defense team had not been able to prepare for.
"It's the problem with these guys: they see stuff that no one else has seen," Kammen said, arguing that it wasn't fair to the defense team to drop new evidence in unexpectedly.
"This is all made up stuff – made up 13 years after!" Kammen said, addressing Bevel. "Where in those notes do you document seeing the things you have seen?"
Prosecutor Stan Levco objected to Kammen's characterization, adding that, "this is not anything new."
"He doesn't have to have a diagram in his notes," Levco stated. "I think he's entitled to draw conclusions!"
"I'm disappointed we didn't work this out before we got the jury in the courtroom," an annoyed Judge Dartt said.
Kammen blasted what he said was Bevel's ability to identify blood merely from looking at photographs.
"It could be Coca Cola!" Kammen said. "That's why we have tests!"
Kammen added that Bevel was claiming to see blood where no other investigator had spotted it.
"To believe him, Lynn Scamahorn and the Indiana State Police for four years had to be doing nothing!" Kammen said. He added later that, "This has absolutely blindsided us, your honor."
"Are you saying you've never seen this picture before, or you don't have these pictures?" Levco asked Kammen, referencing the photo of Jill.
Kammen said this was the first time he'd seen the picture with arrows pointing to supposed blood stains.
Defense attorney Stacy Uliana argued that Bevel should have to show proof that the blood stains existed before he should be able to testify about them before a jury.
"We need to at least have a test to see if it's blood," she said. "Show us proof that the stain exists in a photo in which you can see that the stain exists."
"If he can testify to it, it's a question of weight," he said.
"My gosh, a police officer can say that appears to be blood," he added later.
Shortly after 3 p.m., the judge came to a decision.
"Okay, I think we're done for the day," he said. "I don't want to waste any more of the jury's time."
The jury was then called in and dismissed for the day. Afterward, Judge Dartt agreed to rule on the issue before tomorrow morning.
"You're gonna give the judge homework tonight," Judge Dartt said, "Won't be the first time in this case. Won't be the last time. Did I say that out loud?"
A strange request…
Just before court was adjourned, we learned of an unexpected request by the prosecution. Judge Dartt asked if there were any other issues that might cause a potential snag between the attorneys in the future.
"I am going to ask for the defendant to show his tattoo to the jury," Levco said.
There was some silence before Kammen replied.
"We sure would have liked for the jury to see Mr. Boney's tattoos," he said.
They agreed to discuss the matter further at a later date.
Travis K. Kircher is a Web Producer for WDRB News. He can be reached at email@example.com.