Returning to Five this week is the documentary
series that shows how forensic science is used to

solve real-life crimes. The first episode probes the
shocking murder of the wife and children of a
former state trooper. All the evidence suggested
the ex-policeman was to blame and he was
convicted of the crime – only for new clues to
emerge that indicated a second man was involved.
In September 2000, state police in Albany,
Indiana, were confronted with a most disturbing
crime scene when they responded to a 911 call
from David Camm, a former member of the force.
Camm claimed to have found the bodies of his
wife, Kim, and two children, Brad and Jill – shot
dead in the SUV in their garage. Kim was partially
undressed, suggesting she had been the victim of
a sexual assault, while her shoes had been placed
neatly on the car roof.
“It was a horrific crime – senseless, brutal,”
recalls investigator Wayne Kessinger. Officers were initially at a loss to explain the motive. The absence of a gun ruled out suicide, while there were no missing items to indicate it was a robbery and no signs of a break-in. In the absence of other leads, police began to study their former colleague’s story more closely. Camm was playing basketball with friends on the evening of the murders, only to return home and discover the crime. Initially believing his son was alive, he removed his body from the car and laid him on the garage floor. Yet the scene was suspiciously clean, prompting Camm to claim he had taken care not to disturb the evidence. Officers found it hard to believe that a man in shock attempting to save his son’s life would be so careful. Moreover, there was not enough blood on Camm’s clothes to support his claim that he had moved the boy.
As detectives probed further, they learnt that Camm had been engaged in numerous affairs, and, most shocking of all, autopsies suggested that it was Jill and not Kim who had been the victim of a sexual assault. Did Camm abuse his own daughter? Confronted with news of Jill’s assault, Camm did not appear to be too surprised. “I thought that was a little odd,” recalls investigator Sam Salisian. “If someone had told me that, I would have been very upset.” Officers speculated that his wife had been about to expose him – thus giving him a motive. But the most crucial evidence came when experts found
blood spatter on his clothes that could only be explained if Camm were the shooter.
At the trial, the prosecution combined damning forensic proof with a picture of the defendant as a serial adulterer who most likely molested his own daughter. Camm’s lawyers succeeded in proving that the murders occurred two hours earlier, when Camm was seen playing basketball – but it was not enough to stop him being convicted.
Three years later, however, a new defence team launched an appeal based on fresh evidence including unidentified DNA in the garage. “There is forensic evidence that there was someone else
at the scene that night,” explains lawyer Katherine Liell. The DNA was found to be that of ex-con Charles Darnell Boney, who had a history of violence towards women and – most tellingly – a fetish for women’s shoes. When a palm print on the Camms’ SUV matched to Boney, it seemed investigators had at last discovered who placed Kim’s shoes on the car roof. Boney admitted to supplying Camm with a gun but insisted that the ex-cop carried out the murders. As Boney continued to change his story, the charges against Camm were dropped and he walked free – only to be arrested again an hour later. Investigators now believed that he worked in league with Boney, and two separate trials attempted to establish the truth. Boney was eventually found guilty of murder – yet prosecutors persisted with their case against Camm. Could they find him guilty a second time?