Return to Transcripts main page

Nancy Grace

Entwistle Agrees Not to Oppose Extradition to U.S.

Aired February 10, 2006 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, GUEST HOST: Tonight, breaking news in the double murder mystery unfolding tonight on two continents. In England, Neil Entwistle agrees not to oppose extradition to the United States. That means he would stand trial here for the murder of his wife and baby girl. And in Massachusetts, a loving family mourns, asking why a 27-year-old new mom and her 9-month-old girl would be brutally murdered as they lie together in bed.
And tonight, the retrial of a former Indiana police officer, David Camm, accused of wiping out his own family, wife Kimberly and two beautiful children, 7-year-old Bradley and 5-year-old Jill. Did Camm make a jailhouse confession to fellow inmates?

Good evening, everybody. I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell sitting, in tonight for Nancy Grace. Live to Indiana for the triple murder retrial of David Camm. Did the former state trooper confess to fellow inmates to killing his wife, Kimberly, and two young children, 7-year-old Bradley and 5-year- old Jill?

But first, breaking news out of London. Neil Entwistle, accused in the fatal Massachusetts shootings of his wife, Rachel, and their 9-month- old baby girl, Lillian, agrees to return to the U.S. to face trial for murder.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Neil Entwistle has today consented to his extradition to the USA to face the allegations that have been made against him.

MARTHA COAKLEY, MIDDLESEX COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: There was a bullet that went through the baby into Rachel.

JOE FLAHERTY, RACHEL ENTWISTLE`S FAMILY SPOKESMAN: This was a man that was loved by Rachel and Lillian, who was trusted by the family, and they -- it`s just inconceivable to them that he could betray their trust in this manner and be accused of committing such a horrible crime.

COAKLEY: I must explain to you that Neil Entwistle is under arrest, but he is innocent until he is proven guilty by a court in this country.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He believes that he will receive a fair and proper hearing in the USA of these very serious allegations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s go straight across the Atlantic Nottingham, England, and BBC correspondent James Roberson with the extradition bombshell Neil Entwistle dropped in court today. James, what is the very latest?

JAMES ROBERSON, BBC CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Jane. Yes, it was a very short hearing today. Yesterday`s hearing, where Entwistle appeared in court just after he`d been arrested, was only five minutes. Today was only three minutes long. And what happened was that he came into court. He was dressed in a gray tracksuit and black sweatshirt. He was flanked by security guards.

And the district judge, Anthony Evans (ph), asked him, You`re agreeing to be sent immediately to the U.S., and there will be no extradition proceedings. And Entwistle immediately said that that was OK, That`s right, Yes. And the judge said, I remand you in custody pending your removal to the United States.

He`d also said to Entwistle that it was irrevocable. If you do this, if you sign this paper, you cannot turn back. But Entwistle agreed to it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Apparently, he also turned around, made eye contact with his father and said, I`m OK, Dad. Did you hear that?

ROBERSON: Yes, I believe that is correct. He certainly -- certainly looked at his father. He smiled at him as he left the court, and he appeared relaxed, as he has throughout all of this. But it could just be a -- you know, just a show, in a sense, for the court and to reassure his parents that he`s OK.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, let`s go straight out to prosecutor Eleanor Dixon. He said he wanted to get back as soon as possible to face the music, so to speak. And he also said he wanted to do this to cause as little distress as possible to the victim`s parents, as well as his own parents. Is he suddenly turning into a nice guy with a conscience, or does he think he can beat this rap?

ELEANOR DIXON, PROSECUTOR: I don`t know that he`s a nice guy with a conscience. Somebody with a candidate wouldn`t shoot and murder his wife and baby in cold blood. Of course, the prosecution has to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt.

I think it`s interesting that he agreed to extradition, and I don`t know why. There could be many motives, maybe to spare his family or his wife`s family. But I`m looking at his mental state, and I bet the defense is going to argue his mental state for this crime.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Absolutely. And speaking of that, we have an amazing document that I`m holding in my hands right now. This is the affidavit that accompanied the arrest warrant, essentially. This is a summary of all the evidence that prosecutors have against him, and it includes his explanation for what he was doing on the day of the murders.

Let`s go straight out to Richard Lodge, editor-in-chief of "Metrowest Daily." He`s been covering this from the very beginning. What does Neil say he was doing the day his wife and baby were killed?

RICHARD LODGE, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, "METROWEST DAILY NEWS": Good evening, Jane. The affidavit that was released in Framingham District Court today has Neil Entwistle telling police that he had gone out the morning of January 20 to do an errand, came back two hours later, arriving home at 11:00 AM to find his wife and infant daughter dead of gunshot wounds. He says in the affidavit that he then tried to kill himself with a knife, or thought about it, couldn`t do it, went down to his in-laws` house in Carver, tried to get in there to get a gun because he knew his father-in- law had the gun collection. He couldn`t get in there, according to the affidavit, so he got into his BMW, drove to Logan airport and ended up flying back home to London.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Of course, this isn`t tracking with what the prosecutors say happened. They say he, at some point, stole or borrowed, you might say, his father-in-law`s gun, then killed his wife and baby girl, Lillian, and then secretly returned the gun to the cabinet at his father- in-law`s house. In fact, let`s listen to what the DA had to say precisely about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COAKLEY: He had access both to the house -- and the gun was properly secured, but he also knew where the key to that was. And so without much difficulty, he could have easily let himself into the home. We -- and again, we are not sure when he took the firearm because Rachel`s family never knew it was missing. But it would have been a fairly easy matter for him to go back down Friday, enter the house and replace the gun from where he had taken it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And of course, he has the presumption of innocence. He is merely charged, at this point. He hasn`t been convicted of anything.

But let`s go to defense attorney Michelle Suskauer. Is this basically premeditation with a sloppy cover-up, or could there be any explanation? How does his explanation compare to what the prosecution is saying?

MICHELLE SUSKAUER, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, obviously, it`s very different. And I`m glad that you did point out that he hasn`t been convicted yet. There`s certainly a lot that we don`t know, so let`s not jump the gun, literally. And it is plausible. His explanation is plausible. But I know that there`s some preliminary DNA evidence on the gun that may match the wife. So that`s obviously harmful.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Plausible! His explanation is plausible? Eleanor Dixon, prosecutor, do you see it as plausible?

DIXON: Not in the least. and I would love to be trying this case because all the physical evidence links him to this crime. The DNA on the handgrip of the gun matches him. The blow-back DNA on the gun matches the wife. And guess what? He fled the country. Does that sound like the actions of an innocent man? I don`t think so. You`re not going to leave the country and miss your beloved wife`s funeral and your little baby girl`s funeral. That just didn`t happen in the real world.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s go straight out to noted forensic scientist Dr. Larry Kobilinsky. Let me read from the affidavit because it`s very, very specific here. It says, quote, "DNA matching Neil Entwistle was found on the grip of the firearm, and DNA matching Rachel Entwistle was found on the muzzle end of the firearm." What does that tell us about how the crime occurred? Can you try to paint a picture?

LARRY KOBILINSKY, PROFESSOR OF FORENSIC SCIENCE: I can, Jane. Let me explain it like this. Let`s say you have a gun that`s used in a very close-in shooting, two to three feet away from the victim. What happens is there is, as we heard, blow-back or back-spatter. And what happens is there`s a fine mist of blood comes back at the shooter, and that blood enters the muzzle, the barrel of the gun. So even if you try to clean the gun, you probably are not even aware of this fine mist, and that is DNA, inside the barrel of the gun.

Now, the handgrip, you would try to clean, of course. Handgrips are very good for -- very bad for fingerprints. On the other hand, DNA testing, they`re quite good.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, yes. You always see in the movies people wiping the gun. When couldn`t he have wiped the DNA off, if, in fact, he was the one who did it?

KOBILINSKY: Well, because he probably doesn`t watch "CSI" and he doesn`t understand that there are microtraces of evidence that seal the loop. His story no longer makes sense, once you look at that gun and physical evidence.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s hear what the district attorney had to say about premeditation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COAKLEY: Premeditation can be a tenth of a second. And so we`re not -- we`re still unraveling some of this. It certainly says that there was an intent to -- if this is the person who did it, there was an intent to pull the trigger, there was an intent to kill, intent to murder. And so it`s fairly specific in Massachusetts law that if these facts as alleged are true, then a jury could find someone guilty of premeditation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s go straight out to former Middlesex County prosecutor Gerry Leone. He has just joined us. What do you make of Neil Entwistle`s explanation? Are there lots of holes in it?

GERRY LEONE, FORMER MIDDLESEX COUNTY PROSECUTOR: It`s what I call a theory of half-truths, half-lies. I mean, as he learns about some of the facts and some of the evidence, those are the truths. But as he starts to fill in the holes with his version of the story, those are the half-lies. So you get half-truths, which are the things that we know to be true, but the half-lies are, when he talks, it`s belied by the facts and by the evidence.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well private investigator Tom Shamshak, isn`t that what -- and again, we have the presumption of innocence for Neil Entwistle. But isn`t that what criminals do? They get away from a scene, then think about what they did and they try to come up with an innocent explanation and somehow make it match the evidence.

TOM SHAMSHAK, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR, FORMER POLICE CHIEF: And then they get caught in their lies. And in this case, the damaging evidence mounts on a daily basis. Overwhelming probable cause here. This is a prosecutor`s dream case. I can`t see how anybody fresh out of law school would have trouble prosecuting this case.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, somebody`s going to have to defend him. Michelle Suskauer, what would you do with the information you have at this point?

SUSKAUER: Well, the first thing I would instruct him is not to talk to anyone...

(CROSSTALK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. We know that. But beyond that?

SUSKAUER: ... OK? So obviously, I think what we need to look at here is we need to look at his mental status, and I think Eleanor brought that up before. I think that`s important because that gun is a very damning piece of evidence. And I think that`s probably what he`s going to have to go with. I would want to have a psychiatric evaluation of him because they`re going to be looking at that. They`re going to be looking at his state of mind. I think that`s significant. So that`s the first thing. Also...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So what are you saying, insanity?

SUSKAUER: Well, you know what? I don`t know, OK, because I don`t know -- there`s a lot of...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Because he`s not saying insanity, he`s saying he wasn`t there, that he was doing an errand.

SUSKAUER: I know. I know he made that statement. I don`t know whether that was -- let`s look at, also, is that statement a voluntary statement, OK? I don`t know what his -- I don`t know who...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: He was talking on the phone.

SUSKAUER: ... was present with him.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And that`s an interesting aspect of this case. He went to London and investigators got him on the phone three days after the murders. And this was apparently, allegedly, a conversation that he had on the phone.

SUSKAUER: OK. Well, obviously, that`s going to be a very damaging piece of evidence. But I also think that it`s important to point out -- we should talk about the fact that there`s a question as to the time of death, that the bodies weren`t discovered, and also a corruption of the crime scene because there were people that were walking through this house, not knowing it was a crime scene. And I think those are...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Dr. Kobilinsky...

SUSKAUER: ... important points.

KOBILINSKY: Yes. Well, the time of death was pinpointed sometime on Friday, plus or minus take 24 hours. So in fact, given the time that he got to Logan airport and purchased his ticket, there was plenty of time to commit that crime and then travel. So he`s still included. Unfortunately, that window is very wide.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I want to touch on one other explosive aspect -- we`re going to get to this more -- but the fact that he, according to this affidavit, had complained about his sex life. Let`s go to psychiatrist Lisa Weinstock. How does that fit into all of this?

LISA WEINSTOCK, PSYCHIATRIST: It`s hard to know how that fits in. I mean, clearly, complaining about your sex life is not a motivation to kill your wife. And as we know, they had a young baby. Things were probably changing in the nature of their relationship. But again, as a motive for murder, it seems like not really a very plausible one.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, we also have lots of debt, "Boston Herald" reporting a whole slew of debts, and I think we have a full-screen graphic on this -- $8,000 in credit card debt, more than $2,500 -- or $25,000, actually, in student loans. The rent, $2700 a month, $400 a month for the car lease, and then $660 in business debt.

But you know what? That doesn`t seem like a lot. I mean, it`s a lot, but is it enough to kill?

WEINSTOCK: Well, that`s -- you know, the point is, there seem like there a lot of different stressors, whether we`re talking about changes in their lifestyles, whether we`re talking about changes in their relationships. There are a lot of them, but each one in and of itself doesn`t seem like a motive to kill. The defense may make an argument he was becoming depressed, that all of the stresses were piling up and that they caused a change in the way he was perceiving things, and that that led him to act impulsively. But we`ll have to wait and see.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We want to talk about possible motives more in a moment. Stay with us.

To tonight`s "Case Alert." A new search for missing 24-year-old Jennifer Kesse under way after a person of interest was caught on a surveillance camera where police found her car. Searchers are looking for the Orlando woman`s cell phone, purse, clothing, anything that will give them a clue about what happened to Jennifer. If you have any, any information on Jennifer Kesse, call an anonymous line, 800-423-TIPS. That`s 800-423-TIPS. There is a $115,000 reward.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell, filling for Nancy Grace. Shocking new information tonight laying out the prosecution`s case against Neil Entwistle and his own explanation of what happened the day his wife and baby daughter were shot to death in their Massachusetts home, and a lot of information in this affidavit, which accompanied the arrest warrant.

Let`s go straight out to Gerry Leone, who is a former Middlesex County prosecutor and talk about one of the things that was mentioned in this affidavit is that he had expressed dissatisfaction, allegedly, with his sex life. Who did he say that to?

ROBERSON: It`s my understanding that the statements that are attributed to Entwistle were attributed either to the statements he made when the police contacted him in the U.K. on the Monday after he arrived, or it`s a combination of statements that Entwistle might have made to people, or electronic communications that were taken off of the electronic communication devices that he had that were seized.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s go to Rita Smith, executive director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. You`ve been listening to all of this -- money problems, a new baby, 9 months old, a new country, having lived with the in-laws, then an expensive new home and then alleged dissatisfaction with the sex life. What do you make of it all, as an expert in domestic violence?

RITA SMITH, NATIONAL COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: Well, these are all situations that are not terribly new to anybody. I certainly have had some of those same experiences myself, and they`re very, very weak excuses for violent behavior. There`s just not any good reason why you would want to kill your wife and baby.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So why, then? I mean, it seems incomprehensible, precisely, but as psychologists and social scientists, we have to try to understand the why.

SMITH: Well, I think the why is that -- the only person who knows that is Entwistle. He`s the only person who really knows. But my guess is that he was doing it to gain control back in his life, and having a new baby does take a huge amount of control away from you. So that could have been a mitigating factor, but it`s certainly not a good excuse.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I haven`t done any scientific surveys, but it seems that a lot of these cases that we cover of husbands accused of killing their wives and children happens when the baby is young. Is that a time of high stress for the father?

SMITH: Well, I think that what that signals is a significant change in his control of the family. Her energy is going to be focused totally on the care of that child, and he`s not going to the center focus anymore, and that may be a factor in it. Certainly, most of the homicides occur either during pregnancy or in the first year in a significant number of domestic violence homicides. It`s true.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And everything changes when you have a baby. Physically, the body changes, the priorities change. So as a social scientist, in a sense, do you incorporate that into your theories about why men do what they do?

SMITH: Well, I think that, you know, those significant changes, particularly for the body, are happening more for the woman than the man after a pregnancy and a delivery. But it will change her priorities significantly, in terms of where she spends her time, where she spends her focus, who she`s most concerned about all the time. So if he`s used to having control of all of that and being able to keep her focused on him, that`s going to change significantly, and it may, in fact, you know, create another -- another reason for him to lash out.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And briefly to psychiatrist Lisa Weinstock. Does the husband get jealous of the baby?

WEINSTOCK: Well, we definitely see this. Again, it`s a huge change in the whole dynamic in the relationship from, you know, a couple, a dynamic of two people, to really the baby being the center of the reason for the two people being together. And so certainly, there can be jealousy. But again, as a reason to kill someone, no.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Of course, it`s incomprehensible.

WEINSTOCK: Right.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`re just trying to understand it as best we can.

To tonight`s "Case Alert." The man accused of killing his estranged wife and burying her in a shallow grave in the woods of Georgia made his first court appearance, Quinton Ray, charged with the murder of 26-year-old Sueann Ray, who had been missing for five months before her body was discovered Wednesday. Quinton is expected to go before a grand jury later this month.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t think the victims of homicides ever have closure. They`re going to live with this forever. And maybe -- I think that perhaps there is some peace to the family when somebody is brought to justice on a case like this and the case is solved, and certainly, you know, they get -- as that happens, they get answers. But I don`t know about ever closing something like this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell, sitting in for Nancy Grace. Our focus tonight, Neil Entwistle, accused of killing his wife and daughter and then fleeing to England, and the larger issue of this epidemic of husbands accused of killing their wives. In fact, our next case later in this broadcast, different couple, but same basic issue. So what is going on with couples and violence?

And to find out, we once again have Rita Smith, executive director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Is this a crisis? If so, why is America experiencing this crisis?

SMITH: Well, I think that it`s -- we`ve become much more aware of identifying these as domestic violence homicides, and so I think we hear more about it because reporters have gotten much better at asking the right questions and finding out if there was previous abuse. And so when we hear about it more, I think it`s because we -- as a community, we`re more educated about what we`re actually looking at, and I think...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But are we -- are we a little complacent, too? Because we have a full-screen graphic we`re going to throw up here of some pretty shocking statistics that show, really, pretty rampant violence: 85 percent of victims are women -- and we`re talking about intimate partner violence -- 25 percent of reported rapes are marital, 33 percent of attacks are from spouse -- and we`re talking, I believe, pretty much male spouses in that case -- and 1 in 4 women are a victim of domestic violence. And yet there doesn`t seem to be any kind of national soul-searching or a sense of, This is a serious problem, We ought to do something about this now. And I`m wondering if it`s sort of complacency. Is this business as usual?

SMITH: Well, I do think that it would be really helpful if people got more energized in local communities about trying to reduce the violence in their communities. And I think we all, as individuals, have some responsibility to helping end that violence.

The problem is that if she could stop it on her own, she would. And I think she needs the rest of us to really know what we`re looking for and be willing to intercede to provide resources, so that the families can get free of the violence and that we can all be safer.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And let`s go to prosecutor Eleanor Dixon. You`ve dealt with a lot of very, very tough cases. Is there a sense of complacency, business at usual?

DIXON: I think to some extent, there is. It`s almost like we`ve become used to hearing about husbands killing wives. But it`s not unusual because in homicide cases, it`s often somebody close to the victim. It`s not going to be just a stranger-on-stranger type of situation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The evidence has not changed; we have high- velocity blood splatter evidence that David Camm was at the scene of the crime when it occurred, specifically within four feet, that belonged to Jill Camm.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell sitting in for Nancy Grace.

Another case of a husband accused of killing his own family, David Camm. The former Indiana state trooper is on trial again after his earlier convictions were thrown out. Camm, charged with murdering his wife, Kimberly, their 7-year-old son, Bradley, their 5-year-old daughter, Jill, in court.

Former jail mates have testified Camm confessed to the murders. Let`s go straight out to Lisa Kozarovich, a writer for the "New Albany Tribune," who`s been covering this case from the very start. She was in court today.

Lisa, what happened in court?

LISA KOZAROVICH, "NEW ALBANY TRIBUNE": Well today, we really looked at basketball. That is the alibi that David Camm has had. He was playing basketball with 11 folks at the time of the murders.

The prosecution believes that he was able to leave the gymnasium when he was sitting out one of the games and then go home, about a five-minute drive, kill his family, and return to the gym, and sneak back in.

So today jurors got a videotape viewing of what the gymnasium there in Georgetown looks like. Obviously, this is in another county because of pre-publicity. So they`re not familiar with the gym.

It`s a two-story gym. There are nine exits and entrances, I believe. The jury got a look at that. They also heard from one of the basketball players who said that he couldn`t be sure that David Camm had stayed at the gym that whole time. He saw him play during the first game. David was playing when this gentleman left. He knows that he played another game. He believes he sat out the second or third game. So there is some...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Some doubt about his alibi.

KOZAROVICH: Some doubt.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s go straight to Dr. Larry Kobilinsky. Apparently they also played a dash-cam video showing you could get from the basketball court back to the home, which was the scene of the crime, in five minutes and 14 seconds. What does that say to the jury?

KOBILINSKY: Well, I think the prosecutor has to make the case by showing the time line. Was it possible for him to commit the crime? And here he has an alibi, playing basketball.

But, you know, people are so involved with the game, they don`t really focus. But if you can simply add up the possible time, five minutes back and forth, plus the amount of time it would take to commit the crime, would it fit in with the observation of him back at the court? I think it does.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s go straight out to Nick Stein, the attorney for the family of the murder victim, Kimberly. This has to be hell for your clients, the people you represent. This crime occurred in September of 2000, almost six years ago. They`ve had the trial of the husband, his conviction, then the appeal, the overturning of the conviction, the trial of the alleged accomplice, and now this retrial and very gruesome, graphic testimony.

NICK STEIN, KIMBERLY CAMM FAMILY ATTORNEY: Sure.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: What has it been like?

STEIN: This has been horrible. It`s one of the most horrific crimes in the whole nation, much less southern Indiana. And I was just talking with Lisa here a minute ago how we`ve been involved and the family has been involved with this case for five years now, and how they sat through that first 13-week jury trial and sat for three days for the jury to reach their decision.

And then to have it reversed on appeal, and to go back through the whole thing again, it`s really gruesome and grueling for the family. It sure is.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And some of the most gruesome and horrific aspects of this involve allegations of molestation involving Jill, the 5-year-old girl.

I want to go back to Lisa, because I understand that there was some testimony in court vis-a-vis this molestation but there`s limits on what can be testified to -- Lisa?

KOZAROVICH: Yes. The jury can only hear about the medical examiner`s evidence, bruising, possibly a small tear in the vaginal area.

The medical examiner, actually Kentucky`s chief medical examiner, testified yesterday that, while the injuries were consistent with sexual abuse, they were also consistent with a fall, a straddle fall at the appropriate angle, possibly even scratching.

However, on Monday, we`re going to hear from two pediatric specialists that the prosecution`s bringing in. I think we`re going to get some more details on that.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And let`s hear from the defendant`s brother, Donnie Camm, what he has to say about this whole molestation issue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONNIE CAMM, BROTHER OF DAVID CAMM: We will agree that something happened to Jill. And what happened to Jill happened when she was murdered, and it did not happen prior to that.

The evidence is that Jill was perfectly fine all day long and every day leading up until when she was killed. The prosecution`s own expert testified that her injuries were so severe that she would not have been able to function normally.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: David Camm`s civil attorney, David Mosley, welcome, sir. What do you have to say about this whole controversy over whether or not 5-year-old Jill was molested?

DAVID MOSLEY, DAVID CAMM`S CIVIL ATTORNEY: Well, Jane, thanks for having me. I agree with Donnie; I think that the evidence is certainly that Jill sustained injuries. Whether those were molestation isn`t clear. The doctor testified it`s consistent with molestation, and we think that Charles Boney definitely did something to her.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: This has been very, very difficult for both families, obviously. And we do thank you for speaking to us.

MOSLEY: Yes.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I want to ask you about the recent testimony by two men who were in prison with your client who say he told them he killed his wife. He told them.

And then a third man said that he saw your client one day crying and your client said something to the effect of, "I can still hear my son saying, `Please, Daddy, help me. Please, Daddy, help me.`"

Are all these people lying?

MOSLEY: Well, in a word, yes. These are the typical jailhouse snitch, somebody who`s doing hard time for bad crimes and hoping to benefit. Some of them have been happenstance of being placed to hear confessions of other people in jail and given testimony. So I don`t put a lot of credit in that.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me go back to Nick Stein, the attorney for Kimberly`s family. I`m sure you don`t believe that all three convicts who testified are lying.

STEIN: No. As a matter of fact, I think there`s strength in numbers. You have three separate, independent jailbird snitches, as he calls them. But they give good testimony. And I think the best and most candid one is the one where he said, "Daddy, help me, Daddy." And you just see David must have been there and heard those words.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Oh, it`s so gruesome. This case really boggles the mind. It is that violent.

I`d like to go to prosecutor Eleanor Dixon and talk about another big controversy surrounding this case. When his original -- David Camm`s original conviction was overturned, it had something to do with all the testimony about his alleged affairs, and there was testimony that he had up to 15 alleged affairs. That`s not being allowed in this retrial. What do you make of that? Is that basically hamstringing the prosecution?

DIXON: I think it does a little, but, yet, there`s enough evidence in this case that the prosecution should be able to get a conviction. And the extramarital affairs may give him a motive for the murder.

However, prosecutors don`t have to prove motive to prove a homicide. That might be nice; it might be icing on the cake. But you need to look at every piece of the puzzle in this case.

The jailhouse snitches are one piece of the puzzle. The blood splatter evidence is another piece of the puzzle. Everything adds up. So that`s what you`re looking at as a prosecutor.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And I see forensic scientist Larry Kobilinsky nodding his head.

KOBILINSKY: Yes, I think, Jane, that the key evidence here turns out to be his t-shirt, where you have not only this back spatter that we spoke about a little while ago, .38 is a very powerful round. And if you are two to three feet away, you`re going to get this back spatter.

He`s got the contact blood patterns from Jill. He admitted coming against her to move the body. But what`s key is that back spatter and her tissue is also on the fibers of the t-shirt.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: What`s amazing to me, as we go to break, is that how similar these two cases are that we`re covering, the blow-back or the back spatter.

KOBILINSKY: Right, right.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: The husband accused of killing the wife and a child, in one case, more than one child.

KOBILINSKY: That`s right. And the key is a close-in shooting. Had the gun been further back, more than four feet, this wouldn`t be the case.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And it`s so gruesome. I mean, it`s gruesome to even read about, much less imagine the families of the victims.

Stay right there. We`re going to be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... convinced in their minds, based upon all the facts. They witnessed a trial of David Camm (INAUDIBLE) and nothing, what happened today, nothing in this appellate decision would change that one bit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CAMM: Well, David was playing basketball the night his family was killed. Jim, Brad and Jill, my sister-in-law and my niece and nephew, he was playing basketball. We`ve got 11 alibi witnesses who will testify that David was at the gym from 7:00 until 9:30, or about 9:30, when he got home and found his wife and the kids murdered.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell sitting in for Nancy Grace.

Another key aspect of David Camm`s murder trial on charges of murdering his wife and two kids, the alleged accomplice, Charles Boney. Boney was convicted last month of murder and conspiracy to commit murder. Boney said he sold Camm the gun.

Let`s turn now to NANCY GRACE Internet blogger Clark Goldband. He has a fascinating look at Boney`s writings and what they reveal. This is amazing.

CLARK GOLDBAND, NANCY GRACE INTERNET BLOGGER: Well, that`s right, Jane. Charles Boney, who was convicted for the same crimes that Camm is facing in a separate trial, wrote his statement in March of 2005. We have some of the highlights of this statement here.

Now, Jane, let me stress to you, this is in his own handwriting. This is from Boney himself. And he says, "He was molesting his daughter" -- talking about Camm -- "cheating on his wife, and it all came crashing down when his family had enough. The truth of his affairs and the secrets of what he was doing to his daughter was about to be told, so he shut them up for good."

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, apparently Boney also did a sketch of the crime scene. How would he be able to do that if he wasn`t there?

GOLDBAND: Well, Jane, he says he was outside the crime scene, didn`t really have anything to do with the crime. And his defense was: Hey, just because I was there doesn`t mean I had anything to do with the murder. And that`s what the prosecution is also working with in the Camm case.

We can see the map that Camm drew for investigators on this statement of March of 2005. And he says: Here`s David Camm. This is where the family was. And it was on the left side of the garage, specifically this left side, where the action took place.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And he`s going to go to jail for a long, long time, possibly for the rest of his life.

GOLDBAND: Well, Jane, he will be going to jail for the rest of his life, and he has an autobiography he is working on. I believe we have that here. It`s called "Backbone," but I don`t know if it will be out in stores. He`s going to be stuck in jail the rest of his life.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Michelle Suskauer, defense attorney -- and, by the way, great job, Clark -- Michelle Suskauer, defense attorney, wouldn`t it be a crime, in a sense, if this man who prosecutors say is not the triggerman goes to jail for the rest of his life, but David Camm on his retrial is acquitted because all the evidence about motive and the affairs are not allowed in?

SUSKAUER: Well, let`s make sure that the state is going to use proper evidence, OK? There is an appellate court that -- if he is found guilty and the evidence is all admissible, proper evidence, then he deserves to go away.

But the reason why his case was overturned the first time is because it was just plain bad character evidence. The state went too far in that case, and I think they`re going too far in this case.

If you remember, the appellate judge in the last case, at Camm`s first trial, warned whoever is going to be the trier of fact in the new case, be very careful with that molestation evidence.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But Michelle...

SUSKAUER: And I think the state in this case has bought David Camm a new trial.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But the victim in this case, Kimberly, cannot speak for herself. She is dead.

SUSKAUER: I know.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And prosecutors wanted to introduce -- and I`ll go to Eleanor Dixon on this -- two friends of Kimberly`s who are going to say she was unhappy, she wanted to go to Florida, she wanted out. And they can`t introduce that, probably, because that would be hearsay.

DIXON: Well, yes. And it might go to the character evidence of the defendant.

However, again, you`ve got to look at all the pieces of the puzzle. And as far as the molestation evidence against the daughter, remember, the witness said it was consistent with child molestation, could be, and it also may be consistent with a fall.

Remember, there was no fall. There`s no evidence that the child fell or had some type of injury. So, certainly, I think that evidence is good that`s coming in and not a problem for the prosecution.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But, Eleanor, your thoughts on this other man who prosecutors say did not pull the trigger, going to jail for life? He`s done. He`s over. He`s in jail. And yet David Camm could walk.

DIXON: And that would be a travesty of justice. And it would be a horrible thing, because who was the mastermind? Who was the killer? That`s David Camm. The evidence points to him.

That blood spatter alone on his t-shirt -- think about it. He`s in a small space, in a car, perhaps twisting in to get the shots. It makes perfect sense that that blood spatter ends up on his t-shirt. And how else would it get there, except for the blood coming from his child?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Lisa Kozarovich, is this a case of justice not being blind, that one defendant is a former state trooper and another one is Charles Boney, had a history, a criminal history, and he`s getting the rap?

KOZAROVICH: Charles Boney is definitely going to be in jail for a long time. This trial still has three weeks to go. The defense is just starting to present its case, and I think we`ve seen justice served. I think the jury will consider all the facts in the case and, when it`s all over, hopefully we will have the answers to this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Nick Stein, as the attorney for Kimberly`s family, what are your thoughts on Charles Boney`s involvement in all of this?

STEIN: Well, I`m with the jury in Floyd County, Indiana. He most certainly was involved in this case. He got the gun for David Camm, and he was expecting to be paid from insurance proceeds for getting this gun.

It`s most unfortunate that the jury in Warwick County will not get to hear that evidence, nor will they get to hear the evidence about all the affairs, and the evidence about the molestation is limited.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, how does the family -- how does Kimberly`s family feel about the withholding of all this evidence?

STEIN: I`ll tell you what. Kimberly`s family wants this case done right. They`re appreciative of the prosecutor`s work. They know it has to be done correctly, and they`re sticking it through. They`re confident there`s going to be a conviction.

But they, most of all, want it right this time, because they don`t want a third trial.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me go to you, Lisa Weinstock, and talk about what this family is going through. These crimes occurred six years ago, and you heard the whole litany of legal proceedings that they`ve had to go through. And the testimony is gruesome.

You`re talking about potential molestation on a 5-year-old girl. It`s really almost impossible to read without feeling nauseated. You feel like you want to throw up when you read this stuff.

WEINSTOCK: Absolutely.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And this family has to go through this.

WEINSTOCK: Absolutely. And you know, when you lose a loved one, grief takes a long time. You know, you hear the expression time heals all wounds. It takes a long time to get over any kind of grief.

And to have to go through a trial once, and then have to go through a trial again, and to hear this gruesome evidence over and over again has got to be really painful for all the members of the family involved. I can`t even imagine what they`re going through.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: It`s really almost a form of torture. Thanks.

WEINSTOCK: Absolutely.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Quickly to tonight`s "All-Points Bulletin."

FBI and law enforcement across the country on the lookout for this man, Christopher Dean, wanted in connection with the 2002 Detroit murder of 24-year-old Moises Santiago (ph).

Dean, 25, 6`5", 200 pounds, black hair, brown eyes. If you have any on Christopher Dean, call the FBI at 313-965-2323.

Local news is next for some of you. We will be right back. And remember live coverage of sentencing for Joseph Smith, convicted of kidnapping and murdering 11-year-old Florida girl Carlie Brucia, Court TV, 3:00 to 5:00 Eastern.

Stay with us as we remember Private First Class Scott Messer. This man just 26 years old, an American hero.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell filling in tonight for Nancy Grace. We have been talking about some very, very gruesome cases. The commonalties? These are two men accused of killing their wives and children.

Let`s go straight out again to Rita Smith with the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. We could prosecute cases like this until the end of time, but what do we, as a society, do to try to change the dynamics so there are fewer of these horrific murders occurring?

SMITH: Well, I think that one of the things that we can do is we can educate ourselves to learn the signs. And certainly, on our Web site, we have lots of information about that.

But I think one of the other critical pieces is that, amidst of all this bad news, the good news is that most men aren`t violent. And I think that men need to start stepping up and setting some standards of tolerance that are much lower than what we`ve been allowing in the past, that men to say, you know, jokes aren`t funny, and that it`s not acceptable for you to hurt your wife, and if you`re going to do that, I`m not going to be friends with you.

And if we start to set different standards, I think that maybe we will start to reduce some of the violence and hopefully prevent these tragedies.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And, Michelle Suskauer, you deal with some violent criminals. You`ve defending them in the past. Is that doable? Can we change their makeup? Can we change how people operate?

SUSKAUER: You know, I don`t know if we can change individuals and how they`re brought up, but it is a question of education, and it is a question of maybe bringing it not just to adult men but bringing it to the schools and to children, and talking about violence, and talking about ways to solve problems. I think that`s where it really should start.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Lisa Weinstock, psychiatrist, final thoughts on that?

WEINSTOCK: You know, I agree with both of the last two guests. You know, I think we also need to get the community involved. We hear all these cases, whether they`re murders or child abuse cases, where people will say, "I thought something was going on. I always suspected something was going on, but I didn`t want to get involved."

And I think we all have to be more involved with our communities around us and really pay attention to what`s going on.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You make a very good point. Everybody needs to be part of the solution here, if we want to stop this epidemic of violence.

We want to thank all of our guests tonight. And thanks to you at home for tracking these important cases right along with us.

Also, I would personally like to thank the entire staff of NANCY GRACE, Jen, Elizabeth, Ellie, and the rest of the gang, they have been so patient with me this week, you don`t know. They are brilliant and talented, and they are very, very patient.

Coming up, headlines from around the world. I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell sitting in for Nancy Grace. Nancy will be back on Monday right here at 8:00 sharp Eastern. Have a great weekend.

END