August 31, 2023 • 48 mins
In the early morning hours of June 30th, 1995 in Greensburg, IN, 21 year old mother Kristine Bunch awoke in a carbon monoxide haze to the decimation of her entire world. Junk science and false testimony made matters much, much worse.
In this updated episode, Jason Flom catches up with Kristine at the 2023 Innocence Network Conference to discuss the impactful advocacy work she continues doing to support others who have been wrongfully convicted.
To learn more and get involved, please visit:
https://interrogatingjustice.org/
https://www.justis4justus.org/
https://www.uis.edu/illinoisinnocenceproject
Wrongful Conviction is a production of Lava for Good™ Podcasts in association with Signal Co No1.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
We released the harrowing story of Christine Bunch back in
August twenty twenty. I had a chance to sit down
with her in person at the twenty twenty three Innocence
Network Conference in Phoenix, Arizona. And for those who don't know,
the Innocence Network Conference is a gathering of the innocence
community from all over the country and even the world,
(00:20):
ex hoonneries, advocates, lawyers, and folks like doctor Nicki Ali Jackson,
who was in large part responsible for getting a compensation
statute passed in Indiana, an effort to which Christine Bunch
lent a huge helping hand. Now, last we spoke, Christine
hadn't even received compensation yet, and she was also working
(00:40):
with her own organization, Just Is for just Us. So
much has happened since then, and well, I'm just going
to let her tell you. What do you up to now, Christine.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
I am still on Speaker's Bureau for the Innocence Project
in New York, so I travel around doing speaking engagements.
I am the outreach coordinator for Interrogating Justice, and so
we're providing vetted resources and information on your legal rights
to everybody in every stage of the legal system, not
just the exonerated. And in my spare time, I'm working
(01:13):
with the Illinois Innocence Project because we are doing police training,
and that police training just went mandatory and statewide for
every police academy in Illinois.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
I mean, that's a full dance card right there, and
you do it all with a smile on your face,
which is incredible. Also, Christine, I'm going to brag about
you for a second. It was Christine's case that, when
brought to the attention of the governor, led to the
signing of a bill that established compensation for exoneries in
the state of Indiana. So yeah, you have had a
(01:46):
profound impact on so many people and including me. So
what else? What do you do for fun? Christine?
Speaker 2 (01:53):
I really love pedicures, especially if they serve cocktails while
you're getting your pedicure.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
I mean that's boss.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
And tattoos, and of course playing with my dogs because
I have two beautiful Siberian huskies that make every day perfect.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
What are their names?
Speaker 3 (02:10):
Piper and Paxton?
Speaker 1 (02:12):
Amazing? And how do people find out more about what
you're doing if they want to support it? Is there
a website they can go to? Is there a link
what is there.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
You can go to Interrogating Justice dot org and connect
with us and find ways that you can help. If
your justice impacted, come for help. We want to hear
from you, We want to serve you. We want to
make transition into and out of the system easier for
not only the individual but their families as well, because
families are so impacted. And you can also make yourself
(02:44):
more aware of what's going on the system by listening
to the Wrongful Conviction podcast with Jason.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Flom Ah Yay, thank You. In the summer of nineteen
ninety five, twenty one year old single mom Christine Bunch
was living in a train in Greensburg, Indiana, with her
three year old son Tony. In the early morning hours
of July thirtieth, an electrical fire began between the roof
and the ceiling tiles. When the fire caused one of
(03:11):
the ceiling tiles to fall in Tony's bedroom, a cloud
of carbon monoxide gas killed the little boy before the
fire even could. Christine awoke in a carbon monoxide haze,
desperately trying to save Tony. After failed attempts at extinguishing
the fire, she ran for help. Then she smashed Tony's
bedroom window, but it was too late. She was barefoot, homeless,
(03:35):
and deep in despair. Arson investigator Brian Frank used what
is widely now known as junk science to point the
blame for Tony's death squarely at Christine. So six days
after losing her three year old boy and nearly everything
she ever had, Christine lost her freedom as well. With
(03:56):
no potential alibi or eyewitnesses, the state easily sealed Christine's
fate with the testimony of Brian Frank and ATF forensic
analyst William Cannard. Christine gave birth to her son, Trent,
just a few months after being sent to prison, and
a decade passed before her attorney and a team from
the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University uncovered an
(04:18):
egregious Brady violation and blatantly false testimony, bringing Christine after
seventeen years, one month, and sixteen days behind bars. This
is wrongful conviction with Jason flam Welcome back to wrongful
(04:48):
conviction with Jason flawm that's me, of course, And today
you're going to hear a story that's as heartbreaking and
tragic as it was preventable and it's a remarkable look
inside the systemic flaw as well as human errors that
lead to wrongful convictions. And in this particular case, we're
going to be telling the story and hearing the story
(05:09):
of one of my absolute favorite human beings, a personal
hero of mine, who is doing amazing, amazing things in
the world right now, today and every day. And so
I am thrilled and honored to have with us on
the show today, Christine.
Speaker 4 (05:26):
Bunch, Thank you so much. I'm happy to be here.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
And with Christine as someone whose name you'll probably recognize,
Ron Safer. Ron is a former US attorney turned corporate
lawyer turned justice fighter, and you'll recognize him because he
was a huge part of the Exoneration of Julie Ray,
an episode that I'll never forget and I hope if
you haven't heard it, that you'll go back and take
(05:48):
a listen. Anyway, Ron, welcome back.
Speaker 5 (05:52):
My pleasure to be here. Thank you, Jason.
Speaker 1 (05:54):
So let's get right into it. Christine, you grew up
in Indiana, right I did.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Things took a crazy turn when my parents divorced, but
for the most part I was happy and it was good.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Now at the time of this unimaginable tragedy. You were
just a young mother living in a trailer, working hard,
going to school, just starting your life, just twenty one
years old, right.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
I was working and going to school, and I had
a beautiful three year old son named Tony.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
And then the worst nightmare that any parent can possibly
have or wake up to in a cold sweat, and
some of us probably have had that experience, but it
actually happened to you, and Ron, can you tell us
about that awful morning of June thirtieth, nineteen ninety five.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
What happened was Christine and Tony had gone to sleep
together on a couch in the living room area of
the trailer. Before Christine woke up, Tony had moved to
the front room, which was a separate room from the
living room. Christine awoke to a sound and a small fire.
(07:10):
She was disoriented, but she saw the small fire and
she tried to put it out with a pillow and
couldn't do that, so she tried to smother the fire
with a blanket and that didn't work either. Carbon monoxide
(07:31):
is intoxicating. Christine was undoubtedly affected by this carbon monoxide.
She's trying to put out the fire, she can't find
the fire extinguisher. She knows where the fire extinguisher is,
she can't find it. So by that time, the fire
had grown into a wall between her and Tony and
(07:53):
she could not get to him. So she frantically went
out of the trailer, tried to get help, and then
tried to break the window into the front room so
that she could get to Tony. But it was too late,
and Tony had perished.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
It's impossible to even conceive of the horror and the
panic in a time like that, even if you didn't
have kids, like waking up to a fire. Christine, what
are your memories of that awful night now twenty five
years ago.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
I think the thing that sits with me the most
is it was just normal. I came home from school,
and I got Tony from the babysitter, and we went
home and we cooked.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
And.
Speaker 6 (08:40):
I think we watched some TV and did some laundry,
and we fell asleep.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
I'd read him a story and he wasn't feeling really well,
and we fell asleep on the couch under the air conditioner,
and everything just seemed normal.
Speaker 6 (08:56):
You didn't realize that you were going to wake up
in your whole world would be turned upside down.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Yeah, I mean your whole world was really destroyed at
a time when the community and the system should have
been coming to help you in every conceivable way. Instead,
you were exposed to and victimized by the worst that
(09:23):
the system and our society has to offer. And it's
so important that you're here now because this arson quote
unquote science that they used in order to frame you
and wrongfully convict you for a crime that never even
happened is something that we need to focus on because
we need awareness among everyone because someday, you, the listener,
(09:45):
may find yourself on a jury and you may be
presented with this same sort of junk science.
Speaker 5 (09:52):
So fire investigation was an apprentice art. They were what
would were arded as common knowledge and industry standards that
were passed down from generation to generation. Virtually none of
those conventional wisdom were true, and when tested by scientific principles,
(10:17):
they were all debunked. Unfortunately, that came too late for Christine.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
And this starts with a fire investigator named Brian Frank.
Speaker 5 (10:28):
So what Frank did was the day of this fire,
and keep in mind this trailer was completely incinerated. He
comes into the trailer and just plucks things out of
thin air. He says, Oh, this, this is a burn
(10:48):
pattern on the floor. That's evidence of a liquid accelerant
by gasoline. Ooh, there's a V pattern on the wall.
That is, fire burns up in a V pattern. And therefore,
because there are two of these, there were two points
(11:09):
of origin. A normal accidental fire will have one point
of origin. Sometimes if a fire is intentionally set, it
will have two points of origin. Says Oops, here the
fire burned down. That is a sign of a liquid accelerant.
For all of these reasons, I conclude this was not
(11:32):
an accidental fire. This was intentionally set because, as you
said at the beginning, Jason, unlike many crimes like a
robbery or a fraud or a murder, the question in
an arson is was a crime even committed? And upon
that threshold question rests the lives of hundreds of people,
(11:57):
including Christine.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Here's what's at absolutely nuts is that to become a
licensed arson investigator, one who can testify in court, you
can take a forty hour correspondence course. It takes fifteen
hundred hours in some places. To become a manicurist. You
can't get a barber's license in less than six months.
(12:19):
The idea that they've been relying on these charlatans, you'd
be better off consulting with psychics or even just guessing.
And in Christine's case, there are so many other problems right,
there's a tunnel vision with holding of a sculpatory evidence,
there's multiple incompetent investigators who pass themselves off as experts,
and then it goes downhill from there. So there you
(12:43):
are outside the house and in minutes, in moments, your
life has gone from a good life, full of love
and hope to the worst imaginable scenario.
Speaker 6 (12:54):
You're just in shock, and you don't really believe what
people are telling you because they kept telling me, no,
you can't go in and know we couldn't get hit
him and know.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
He's not alive.
Speaker 6 (13:07):
And of course, as a parent, you don't want to
believe that.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
People on the outside want to look at it.
Speaker 6 (13:15):
And say, well, if this was done differently, or if
you had acted this way.
Speaker 4 (13:22):
And I mean, for myself, I have played.
Speaker 3 (13:26):
It over and over and over and over again in
my mind.
Speaker 6 (13:30):
I still every day that I wake up play it
over in my mind, and.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
I don't know how to come up with a different scenario.
When you're in that moment and the terror paralyzes you, you.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Don't know what you would do.
Speaker 6 (13:48):
So it's easy to stand outside and say this should
have never happened, and somebody has to be blamed.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
Right, because the alternative is incomprehensible to most people. Why
innocent baby would be taken from us? Christine? Six days
in hell? Right? Six days for you between the fire
and the loss of your child and the time that
you're arrested. What were those six days?
Speaker 7 (14:16):
Like?
Speaker 1 (14:16):
What were you doing?
Speaker 2 (14:18):
I went with my parents to play a funeral, and
my mom and dad really went through how the service
was going to be, and I just remember sitting there
and crying. And then I told him that I wanted
a song played something that I, you know, sang with Tony,
(14:42):
and he said, we can play whatever you want, and.
Speaker 8 (14:47):
Then I had to go get clothes to her to
a funeral. At that time, I was still walking around
barefoot because I'd literally lost everything, and everybody was trying to,
you know, comfort you and give you advice, and it just.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
Doesn't comfort you.
Speaker 2 (15:08):
So you feel more alone than ever because you don't
want to hurt their feelings, but everything they're saying to
you doesn't penetrate. The police didn't help because they followed
me everywhere I went and talked to everybody after I left,
(15:29):
and they even showed up and my son's funeral and burial.
Speaker 6 (15:35):
They came to me before I even got out of
the hospital and told me that it was an arson.
Speaker 4 (15:40):
They literally wanted a list.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Of all my family and friends, anybody that could have
possibly done it.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Then they come back to me and say, no, you're
you're the person. You're under arrest for this.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
And in a small town, once.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
They make or arrest and put a headline on the
paper in a small community, in that community's mind, you're guilty.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
So now you're arrested. How long were you held before
the trial? Were you able to bail out?
Speaker 2 (16:12):
I was in there from July sixth to October. Mid October,
I bonded out on a fifty thousand dollars cash bond.
I tell my son Trent all the time that he's
the miracle that saved me. But when I got out,
I certainly didn't care if I lived or died, and
(16:33):
so I was drinking and doing a lot of self
medicating because I just didn't want to feel anymore. And
in the midst of that, I started getting sick and
that's when I discovered I was pregnant.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Yeah, and that's the worst possible scenario. Although now, as
you said, it turns out to be the thing that
saved you. And we'll get into more of that later.
But Ron, this trial is full of I mean again,
it's horseshit, the stuff that they were spewing from the stand.
Speaker 5 (17:12):
It began with the prosecutor standing in front of the
jury and saying, motive is not an element of the crime.
We don't have to prove motive. People tend not to
commit crimes for no reason. And of course they investigated
Christine and her motive for this crime, and they found
(17:35):
that she was a good, loving, caring, wonderful mother and
that she and Tony had a beautiful relationship. Everybody said
that universally, and so they're left with telling the jury, Okay,
Christine committed this horrific crime for no reason, but we
(17:59):
don't have to prove motive. Then their case depended one
hundred percent on this quote unquote expert testimony, because Christine
didn't set this fire. So of course, nobody saw her
set the fire, nobody saw her prepare to set the fire,
(18:19):
nobody heard her talk about setting the fire, nobody afterwards.
There was no physical evidence, no forensic evidence, nothing. Of course,
the trailer wasn't insured. She lost all of her possessions,
She lost, of course, the person who meant most to
her in the world. So they were left with this
(18:40):
expert testimony, these absurd fire investigation myths, which should have
and could have been dispelled by a defense attorney or
a competent defense expert. But there was something else that
was critical in this trial that would have been difficult
(19:01):
for a defense attorney to combat.
Speaker 1 (19:03):
And I have to tell the audience that this critical
evidence becomes just as important later to prove in Christine's
innocence as it was in getting her convicted. But go ahead, Ron.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
They took ten samples from the trailer, from the floor
of the trailer, from the carpet of the trailer, from
Christine's nightgown, and they tested it for various accelerants. There
was no gasoline. There was no inflammatory substance of any
(19:34):
kind on Christine's nightgown, even though they said that she
would splash this accelerant all around. But there were two
positive samples, and those samples, by the way, were given
to the Durea of alcohol to back on firearms atf
who federally investigates arson crimes and they have special laboratories,
(19:57):
and they did gas chromatizeography on these samples, and they
presented evidence at trial that there were two positive tests
for what they called a heavy petroleum distillate like jet
fuel or something else specifically not kerosene, and that was
(20:24):
found in the living room area and critically in the
front room, the room where Tony was found. Now, there
is reason for there to be kerosene in the living
room because the prior owners of this trailer testified that
they had a kerosene heater and that they overfilled it
(20:46):
from time to time. Kerosene does not evaporate, and so
even from years before, there would be kerosene in the wood.
But there's no explanation for a heavy petroleum distillate like
jet fuel. End there is absolutely no innocent explanation for
there to be a heavy petroleum distolate in the front
(21:09):
room Tony's bedroom, and that was critical evidence that was
not refuted by the defense attorney and on the strength
of that expert testimony of end these critical lab determinations.
Christine was convicted.
Speaker 1 (21:28):
March fourth, nineteen ninety six, twenty two years old. Pregnant
Christine is convicted of arson and murder. Less than a
month later, she's sentenced to two concurrent terms, sixty years
for murder and fifty years for arson. So how pregnant
were you, Christine at the time of this wrongful conviction?
(21:49):
And what the hell was it like giving birth behind bars?
Speaker 2 (21:54):
I was almost six months pregnant. The only thing they
don't do to pregnant women is make them wear the
belly chain and the box because the baby's not a prisoner.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
But with so many pregnant women in there.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
You don't always get soft cuffs for your feet. So
I've got deep scars on the back of my ankles
from wearing those metal shackles. And then when I finally
went into labor, I didn't really know that I was in.
Speaker 3 (22:30):
Labor because I was just having a backache.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
So they took me to the infirmary and couldn't find
a heartbeat. I lost it. I started, you know, screaming
at him, and so I was.
Speaker 6 (22:42):
Handcuffed and shackle and taken out into an ambulance, and
when I got to the hospital, a doctor come in
and explained that I was having contractions and that's why
they could hear the heartbeat. They determined that I was
going to have an emergency see section, so the handcuffs
and shackles came off and I got a metal cuff
on my ankle in the log chain. I got about
(23:07):
thirty six hours with Trent, and.
Speaker 2 (23:10):
Then I was transferred back to the facility and my
family took him home.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
The Pacers Foundation is a proud supporter of this episode
of Rawful Conviction and of the Last Mile organization, which
provides business and tech training to help incarcerated individuals successfully
and permanently re enter the workforce. The Pacers Foundation is
committed to improving the lives of Hoosiers across Indiana, supporting
organizations that are dedicated primarily to helping young people and students.
(23:44):
For more information on the work of the Pacers Foundation
or the Last Mile Program, visit Pacersfoundation dot org or
the Lastmile dot org. This episode is sponsored by AIG,
a leading global insurance company, Paul Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton and Garrison,
a leading international law firm. The AIG pro Bono program
(24:06):
provides free legal services and other support to many nonprofit
organizations and individuals most in need, and recently they announced
that working to reform the criminal justice system will become
a key pillar of the program's mission. Paul Weiss has
long had an unwavering commitment to providing impactful pro bono
legal assistance to the most vulnerable members of our society
(24:28):
and in support of the public interest, including extensive work
in the criminal justice area. So the good news is
that there is actually an equal or greater number of
heroes in this story than villains Betsy Marx, Hillary po Rix,
(24:48):
Jamie McAllister, and the other two actual fire scientists, John
Dehan and John Malouley, plus the electrical engineer Richard Hansen.
Then Karen Daniel and Jane Raley. Legends in the field
were on your side. And of course Ron himself, Ron Safer,
I mean, the fucking cavalry came in on this one, right.
(25:10):
Can you talk now about the process that led seventeen
years later to Christine finally coming home.
Speaker 5 (25:18):
Yes, Christine pursued this tirelessly against all odds, found a
wonderful local attorney, Hillary bo Rix, who believed in Christine
but really did not have the resources to take on
the awesome power of the state, and a supporter of
(25:39):
Christine wrote a letter to Northwestern Center on Wrongful Convictions,
and Jane Railey, along with Karen Daniel, took Christine's case
and they disassembled every piece of evidence the state put forward.
Karen and Jane assembled the world's experts on fire science,
(26:02):
not the myths of arson investigation, but on fire science,
to prove first that everything the state said was wrong,
and then second that Christine was innocent, not beyond a
reasonable doubt, beyond any doubt. So first they got a
former ATF agent and he testified that every one of
(26:26):
the myths that was used by the so called arson
investigator Brian Frank was wrong. A V pattern does not
indicate a point of origin. It indicates a point where
something burned against a wall. Fire burns down not because
of a liquid accelerant, but because it's seeking oxygen and
(26:47):
there was a hole in the trailer. So the burn
patterns that Frank says indicated that there was a liquid
accelerant have been disproved. Brian Frank said that the fire
was hotter because a liquid accelerant was used. That is
a myth. Controlled experiments prove that fire is no hotter. Indeed,
(27:10):
the heat depends on what is being burnt. So chemistry
physics disproved every one of the pieces of evidence. But
there was one more critical thing that Karen Daniel did
that was pivotal. She subpoened the underlying test data that
(27:31):
had been used by the ATF Lab and all of
the documents related to those tests, and what that found
was stunning. First, she got the actual gas chromatographs, so
the actual tests and contrary to his testimony, he did
(27:51):
test against the standard of kerosene, not a heavy distilla,
but kerosene. Then when you look at those actual tests data,
you find that yes, there was kerosene in the living
room where the kerosene heater had been years before. But
then you look at the sample from Tony's bedroom, the
(28:13):
sample that convicted Christine, and the test was negative for
any liquid accelerate, kerosene, heavy petroleum distillate, nothing. What's more,
in that file, there was a draft report that reflected
(28:34):
accurately the test results, that is that there had been
kerosene in the living room and that the sample in
Tony's bedroom was negative, and then there was a report
that in handwriting that crossed that out and made that
test result positive. How that happened, unfortunately, we'll never know
(28:57):
because by the time we got to the hearing, the
ATF agent, who has now deceased, was incompetent in an
assisted living home and could not testify about what happened.
But what was clear was Christine was convicted based on
(29:18):
not only faulty but false evidence. So that takes care
of the States case.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
So Christine's team exposed the junk science and the outright
falsification of the real scientific data that led to her conviction.
And by the way, these are your tax dollars at work.
And if you don't think this could happen to you, well,
don't even get me started. There's more to this, and
I'm talking about with the defenses expert Jamie McAllister testified
to about how the fire really started.
Speaker 5 (29:49):
Jamie McAllister, who is an expert in examining the victim's
chemistry and reverse engineering how a fire must have started,
testified about how this fire started. Tony died before the
fire got hot. He died of carbon monoxide poisoning. There
(30:10):
was no burning in his trachea, no burning in his lungs,
and so he had stopped breathing before the fire got hot.
His carboxy hemoglobin rate, which is what we referred to
as carbon monoxide poisoning. It's when the carbon monoxide bonds
with your blood. The hemoglobin was eighty percent. Fifty percent
(30:34):
is lethal. So how did it get that high? Well?
Jamie McAllister testifies that controlled experiment show that if the
fire had started out in the open air of the
living room or the bedroom, it would have produced a
lot of carbon dioxide to oxygen molecules. Because there's a
(30:55):
lot of air floating around and very little carbon monoxide
one oxygen molecule. It would have taken ninety minutes for
the fire to have produced enough carbon monoxide for Tony
to have gotten to a carboxy hemoglobin rate approaching eighty percent.
(31:17):
He would have burned to death long before that, and
of course his lungs in everything else would have burned.
That didn't happen. So how did this fire happen? Well,
as an electrician testified, there were electrical wires that were
overloaded that ran between the roof and the drop down
(31:40):
ceiling tiles. There was an electrical fire that started that morning.
But because there's limited oxygen there, what happens is the
fire smolders and it produces a lot of carbon monoxide
up in the ceiling. Now, eventually the fire gets hot
(32:01):
enough so that one of the ceiling tiles burns and
drops to the floor. That undoubtedly is what Christine awakens to. Now,
when that happens, the carbon monoxide fills the Tony's room
like a balloon that is letting out its air. Physical
tests and chemical tests prove within minutes he dies of
(32:26):
carbon monoxide poisoning. That's how this fire had to have happened.
And thus, not only was there no evidence that Christine
was guilty of an arson, there was conclusive evidence that
the fire was an accidental fire that took place in
(32:46):
the confined area of the ceiling, and that Tony died
as everybody knew, of carbon monoxide poisoning.
Speaker 1 (32:55):
But in spite of all of this, on June eighth
of twenty ten, now over four years after your conviction,
Judge Weshoffer denied you a new trial. He said, quote
while and this is a quote, while MSS Bunch had
new resources available to her at the post conviction hearing.
New experts do not create new evidence. The issues raised
(33:17):
and the conclusions reached, while packaged differently, remained basically the
same as they were at trial in nineteen ninety six
end quote. He went on to add that he did
not believe the ATF documents would have changed the outcome
of the trial. And I mean it was exposed that
they falsified the findings and said the samples were positive
(33:38):
when they weren't. What the actual fuck like And this again,
if you don't think this can happen to you, and
I'm talking to the audience now, of course you're wrong.
A very large percentage of judges are elected and the
others are appointed by elected officials. Either way, your decisions
in the voting booth are going to determine who ends
(34:00):
up on the bench. So and of my rant, back
to the story. Meanwhile, another Indianapolis lawyer joins the team,
John Larimore. And then we get to the good stuff.
Right On July thirteenth, twenty eleven, Ron who's here with
us now, argued in front of a three member panel
of the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Speaker 5 (34:22):
At the argument itself, it was very clear from the
questioning of the judges that one judge was dead set
against us. There was nothing I was going to be
able to say to change his mind. One judge was
for us, and no matter how incoherently I babbled, he
was going to vote for us. And so the middle judge,
(34:44):
the chief judge, held Christine's fate in her hand. Our
working theory and it made sense was that if the
court was going to reverse this conviction, they would have
done it right away because they know she's sitting in jail.
So we're sitting there understanding that the longer this goes on,
(35:05):
the more likely it is we lost. As time wore on,
despair grew.
Speaker 1 (35:12):
And eight of what must have been truly agonizing months later, Christine,
on March twenty first of twenty twelve, in a two
to one decision, the panel reversed the conviction and granted
you a new trial, citing the evolution of fire science
as well as the fact that the sculpatory evidence was
(35:32):
withheld that quote unquote directly contradicted ATF forensic analyst William
Kinnard's trial testimony. Christine, how did you find out about
this momentous decision.
Speaker 2 (35:44):
I got a call to come to the counselor's office
and my lawyers were on the phone.
Speaker 6 (35:49):
To tell me that they had reversed my conviction and
remanded for a new trial.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
I started crying, and I asked them if they called
my son.
Speaker 3 (36:00):
Him to know that I won and I was going.
Speaker 6 (36:03):
To come home, and so they assured me that yes,
they were calling him, and I ended up. I stayed
at the counselor's office for like an hour and a
half because I head back to back calls, and she said,
you know, she said, we're just gonna make this your day,
so everybody can call and congratulate you and tell you
(36:24):
the news.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
And they were just so happy for me.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
Ron, What about you? What's your recollection of that phone call?
Speaker 5 (36:31):
I cared beyond measure about Christine in this case and
getting her out of jail, and when it ultimately happened,
it was as if it was happening to my sister.
Just the most moving experience. Although the reality comes home
of Okay, she's not out of jail, she gets a
(36:55):
new trial, she's still sitting in jail. We got to
get her out of jail.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
So almost five months go by, after March twenty first,
twenty twelve, and the amazing phone call, all the way
to August eighth, when the Indiana Supreme Court left the
Appellate Court's decision undisturbed, and then finally about a month
after that, September one, twenty twelve, seventeen years, one month
and sixteen days after you were arrested, Christine, you were
(37:24):
finally released into the arms of your family. What was
that like?
Speaker 2 (37:28):
Well, I mean, when you first walk out, I think
all you're looking at is the dream finally happened.
Speaker 3 (37:35):
And I have so many possibilities.
Speaker 6 (37:39):
After that initial who wears off, then you're left with
all of these fears and insecurities. It was great walking
out and seeing everyone, but then you know, I'm facing
another murder trial, so we have to start prepared for that.
Speaker 3 (38:01):
And I have.
Speaker 6 (38:03):
You know, my son, who I have to provide a
home for, and I have to make sure that he
has everything he needs. He's just sixteen, so I don't
have a driver's license, I don't have any kind of ID,
I don't have Renner's history, credit score, all of these things.
Speaker 3 (38:20):
I don't even know where I'm going to get a job.
Speaker 6 (38:22):
After seventeen years, so fear starts to take you over,
and I think that at first, I was just like,
I'm not.
Speaker 3 (38:32):
Going to make it. There's no way I'm going to
be able to make it.
Speaker 6 (38:36):
And that first night, my son was showing me on
his laptop how to set up a Facebook account, and
while I'm looking at it, I see that he has
the appellate court site bookmarked.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
And I said, why do you have that?
Speaker 6 (38:53):
And he looked at me and he said, because I
checked every day to see if they made a decision and.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
You were come.
Speaker 4 (39:02):
And I started to crying and.
Speaker 2 (39:05):
I said, you know, I said, I've been so worried
and so unsure, but.
Speaker 4 (39:11):
Hearing that you believed in me and we're.
Speaker 6 (39:13):
Just waiting for me to come home, I can make
it through anything.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
Then another and a long line of amazing developments in
your case happened just before Christmas, which must have made
that time of year even sweeter. The prosecution finally came
around to their senses and dropped the charges, which brings
us to your next struggle, compensation for all that lost time,
And of course no amount of money can be enough
(39:48):
to repay what you lost, but you had an uphill
battle and a unique struggle just to even get compensation.
Can you fill us in on that.
Speaker 3 (39:55):
Yes, So, like everyone, I filed a civil suit.
Speaker 6 (40:00):
Clearly people are protected, so you have to break through
immunity to try to sue. The issue is the ATF
chemist is deceased, so I didn't have a lead to
stand on, and that was ultimately dismissed.
Speaker 4 (40:16):
Compensation.
Speaker 6 (40:17):
I have been working since I've been out, and well,
I've helped pass new legislation in three different states, working
with the Innocence Project. This past year, we passed compensation
in Indiana, and then when my civil suit was dismissed,
I applied for the compensation. You know, it was I think,
(40:39):
very surreal to receive a letter from them saying that
just because my conviction was reversed and I wasn't retried
did not mean that I was actually innocent. And it really,
I mean, it hurt my feelings.
Speaker 2 (40:52):
Because I testified before these legislators three separate occasions.
Speaker 4 (40:58):
The senators and representatives.
Speaker 6 (41:00):
That pass this bill used my case to pass this
compensation bill, and then you're going to basically retry me
all over again.
Speaker 1 (41:10):
So are they really trying to relitigate this case?
Speaker 2 (41:14):
No?
Speaker 3 (41:14):
They are not.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
But as you go through the process, you fill out
a compensation application and then they review it. So for them,
they reached out to the prosecutor, and the prosecutor said,
you know, no, we didn't have evidence at the time
to retry this, but you know, we aren't going to
say we made a mistake. They never want to say
(41:36):
they made a mistake. So I had to reach out
to everyone I knew, the Center on Wrongful Convictions with
you know, the amazing Laura and I writer and Steve Drisen,
Ron Safer and all of them wrote letters and submitted
the evidence that was used to.
Speaker 6 (41:55):
Exonerate me, in order to show them that I am
innocent and were of this conversation.
Speaker 3 (42:01):
Twenty five years after the fact.
Speaker 6 (42:04):
They are reviewing the application. They've been reviewing it since November.
Speaker 1 (42:09):
Yeah, well, let's hope they come to their senses and
come to the right decision, because I think the right
thing to do is clear to everyone who's listening and
to anyone with a heart and a soul. So let's
get to what you're doing now. You started an organization
called just is for just us.
Speaker 2 (42:27):
Just is just like it sounds, because the situation just
is and then it's for just Us, which means all
of us exoneries. Justice for just Us was started by
myself and another exonery that came from the Center on
Wrongful Convictions and Juana and I just basically wanted to
(42:47):
address what it was like because when people walk out,
you don't have a toothbrush, you don't have the basic necessities.
So j for Jay for short. You know, we're helping
with boxes.
Speaker 6 (42:58):
If somebody reaches out and says, hey, I need an outfit,
I need basic hygienes, we put that together. We've helped
take some axonneries to the Innocence Conference, sent out gas cards,
cash cards, we've paid rent, we've paid bills, and our
organization allows healthcare providers to donate services so they can
(43:19):
get a dental visit or some counseling sessions or a
physical things that are desperately needed when you return.
Speaker 1 (43:28):
It's such an important thing, you know. I've tried to
devote myself to doing as much as I can to
help people coming out of the system, because it's exactly
as you described. It's like I call it the second punishment,
and what I mean by that is most people coming
out have no support whatsoever. They may get forty dollars
and a bus ticket and then you know, not even
(43:49):
a good luck. So there are a number of wonderful
organizations doing this work, and I encourage everyone to support
just is for just Us. So please every scroll down
on the episode description and get involved with Justice for
just Us. And now this is the part of the show,
of course, that we call closing arguments. So first of all,
(44:10):
thank you to our phenomenal guest today. The closing argument
segment works like this, I turn off my microphone, kick
back on my chair, leave my headphones on. Sometimes I
close my eyes, and we're going to let each of
you have the final word on whatever you want to
talk about. So let's go to Ron first and then
Christine you can just take us out.
Speaker 5 (44:30):
Well, first of all, thanks so much Jason for telling
this story, for telling the other stories. It is so
critically important to raise public awareness of these wrongful convictions.
We have the best criminal justice system in the world,
but it is run by human beings, and human beings
(44:54):
are flawed. They make mistakes, They at times act in
intentionally maliciously. When that happens, it takes enormous resources to
get the system back on track, and so few people
are able to afford those resources or are given those resources.
(45:17):
So what has to happen is everybody involved in the system, prosecutors, judges,
jurors have to have an open mind. They have to
be persons of goodwill. We as citizens have to hold
(45:38):
them accountable that their jobs are not to get convictions,
their jobs are to do justice, and we have to
insist on that. We have to enter that jury box
as citizens, giving credence to the presumption of innocence that
our constitution requires. They're not words, they are a critical concept.
(46:04):
But if we don't pay attention to it, if we
don't honor it, then wonderful people like Christine will have
their lives robbed from them, losing decades that nobody can
give back to them. And so this is a call
to action. We have to be more active, We have
(46:29):
to be more responsible. We have to be accountable and
make sure that everybody in the system is accountable.
Speaker 6 (46:40):
Christine, when I go speak to the community and tell
them how they can help with j for Jay, or
how they can help the Innocence Project, or how they
can step up and make changes within our system, because
it is a great system.
Speaker 3 (46:58):
It is designed to work.
Speaker 6 (47:01):
And we have to take responsibility and make sure it works.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
So I know that everybody is sitting.
Speaker 6 (47:07):
There saying I don't have money to donate, but everybody
does have to step up and say I have something.
Speaker 3 (47:14):
To give here.
Speaker 2 (47:16):
I can vote, I can educate myself so that when
I'm sitting on a jury, I know what I'm listening
to because the CSI you watch on TV that's not
always accurate. So really learning about these issues, really raising
your voice and.
Speaker 3 (47:34):
Saying you know, we need to change some things. That's
how we make the world better.
Speaker 7 (47:40):
And I encourage all of you to learn about this
and figure out if you can help by voting, by
sharing our stories, by talking to an axonary, by just.
Speaker 1 (47:51):
Being there, don't forget to give us a fantastic you
wherever you get your podcasts, it really helps. And I'm
a proud donor to the Innocence Project, and I really
hope you'll join me in supporting this very important cause
and helping to prevent future wrongful convictions. Go to Innocence
(48:13):
Project dot org to learn how to donate and get involved.
I'd like to thank our production team, Connor Hall and
Kevin Wartis. The music in the show is by three
time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow
us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction and on Facebook at
Wrongful Conviction Podcast. Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flamm is a
production of Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal
(48:37):
Company Number one
We released the harrowing story of Christine Bunch back in
August twenty twenty. I had a chance to sit down
with her in person at the twenty twenty three Innocence
Network Conference in Phoenix, Arizona. And for those who don't know,
the Innocence Network Conference is a gathering of the innocence
community from all over the country and even the world,
(00:20):
ex hoonneries, advocates, lawyers, and folks like doctor Nicki Ali Jackson,
who was in large part responsible for getting a compensation
statute passed in Indiana, an effort to which Christine Bunch
lent a huge helping hand. Now, last we spoke, Christine
hadn't even received compensation yet, and she was also working
(00:40):
with her own organization, Just Is for just Us. So
much has happened since then, and well, I'm just going
to let her tell you. What do you up to now, Christine.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
I am still on Speaker's Bureau for the Innocence Project
in New York, so I travel around doing speaking engagements.
I am the outreach coordinator for Interrogating Justice, and so
we're providing vetted resources and information on your legal rights
to everybody in every stage of the legal system, not
just the exonerated. And in my spare time, I'm working
(01:13):
with the Illinois Innocence Project because we are doing police training,
and that police training just went mandatory and statewide for
every police academy in Illinois.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
I mean, that's a full dance card right there, and
you do it all with a smile on your face,
which is incredible. Also, Christine, I'm going to brag about
you for a second. It was Christine's case that, when
brought to the attention of the governor, led to the
signing of a bill that established compensation for exoneries in
the state of Indiana. So yeah, you have had a
(01:46):
profound impact on so many people and including me. So
what else? What do you do for fun? Christine?
Speaker 2 (01:53):
I really love pedicures, especially if they serve cocktails while
you're getting your pedicure.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
I mean that's boss.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
And tattoos, and of course playing with my dogs because
I have two beautiful Siberian huskies that make every day perfect.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
What are their names?
Speaker 3 (02:10):
Piper and Paxton?
Speaker 1 (02:12):
Amazing? And how do people find out more about what
you're doing if they want to support it? Is there
a website they can go to? Is there a link
what is there.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
You can go to Interrogating Justice dot org and connect
with us and find ways that you can help. If
your justice impacted, come for help. We want to hear
from you, We want to serve you. We want to
make transition into and out of the system easier for
not only the individual but their families as well, because
families are so impacted. And you can also make yourself
(02:44):
more aware of what's going on the system by listening
to the Wrongful Conviction podcast with Jason.
Speaker 1 (02:49):
Flom Ah Yay, thank You. In the summer of nineteen
ninety five, twenty one year old single mom Christine Bunch
was living in a train in Greensburg, Indiana, with her
three year old son Tony. In the early morning hours
of July thirtieth, an electrical fire began between the roof
and the ceiling tiles. When the fire caused one of
(03:11):
the ceiling tiles to fall in Tony's bedroom, a cloud
of carbon monoxide gas killed the little boy before the
fire even could. Christine awoke in a carbon monoxide haze,
desperately trying to save Tony. After failed attempts at extinguishing
the fire, she ran for help. Then she smashed Tony's
bedroom window, but it was too late. She was barefoot, homeless,
(03:35):
and deep in despair. Arson investigator Brian Frank used what
is widely now known as junk science to point the
blame for Tony's death squarely at Christine. So six days
after losing her three year old boy and nearly everything
she ever had, Christine lost her freedom as well. With
(03:56):
no potential alibi or eyewitnesses, the state easily sealed Christine's
fate with the testimony of Brian Frank and ATF forensic
analyst William Cannard. Christine gave birth to her son, Trent,
just a few months after being sent to prison, and
a decade passed before her attorney and a team from
the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University uncovered an
(04:18):
egregious Brady violation and blatantly false testimony, bringing Christine after
seventeen years, one month, and sixteen days behind bars. This
is wrongful conviction with Jason flam Welcome back to wrongful
(04:48):
conviction with Jason flawm that's me, of course, And today
you're going to hear a story that's as heartbreaking and
tragic as it was preventable and it's a remarkable look
inside the systemic flaw as well as human errors that
lead to wrongful convictions. And in this particular case, we're
going to be telling the story and hearing the story
(05:09):
of one of my absolute favorite human beings, a personal
hero of mine, who is doing amazing, amazing things in
the world right now, today and every day. And so
I am thrilled and honored to have with us on
the show today, Christine.
Speaker 4 (05:26):
Bunch, Thank you so much. I'm happy to be here.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
And with Christine as someone whose name you'll probably recognize,
Ron Safer. Ron is a former US attorney turned corporate
lawyer turned justice fighter, and you'll recognize him because he
was a huge part of the Exoneration of Julie Ray,
an episode that I'll never forget and I hope if
you haven't heard it, that you'll go back and take
(05:48):
a listen. Anyway, Ron, welcome back.
Speaker 5 (05:52):
My pleasure to be here. Thank you, Jason.
Speaker 1 (05:54):
So let's get right into it. Christine, you grew up
in Indiana, right I did.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Things took a crazy turn when my parents divorced, but
for the most part I was happy and it was good.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Now at the time of this unimaginable tragedy. You were
just a young mother living in a trailer, working hard,
going to school, just starting your life, just twenty one
years old, right.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
I was working and going to school, and I had
a beautiful three year old son named Tony.
Speaker 1 (06:27):
And then the worst nightmare that any parent can possibly
have or wake up to in a cold sweat, and
some of us probably have had that experience, but it
actually happened to you, and Ron, can you tell us
about that awful morning of June thirtieth, nineteen ninety five.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
What happened was Christine and Tony had gone to sleep
together on a couch in the living room area of
the trailer. Before Christine woke up, Tony had moved to
the front room, which was a separate room from the
living room. Christine awoke to a sound and a small fire.
(07:10):
She was disoriented, but she saw the small fire and
she tried to put it out with a pillow and
couldn't do that, so she tried to smother the fire
with a blanket and that didn't work either. Carbon monoxide
(07:31):
is intoxicating. Christine was undoubtedly affected by this carbon monoxide.
She's trying to put out the fire, she can't find
the fire extinguisher. She knows where the fire extinguisher is,
she can't find it. So by that time, the fire
had grown into a wall between her and Tony and
(07:53):
she could not get to him. So she frantically went
out of the trailer, tried to get help, and then
tried to break the window into the front room so
that she could get to Tony. But it was too late,
and Tony had perished.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
It's impossible to even conceive of the horror and the
panic in a time like that, even if you didn't
have kids, like waking up to a fire. Christine, what
are your memories of that awful night now twenty five
years ago.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
I think the thing that sits with me the most
is it was just normal. I came home from school,
and I got Tony from the babysitter, and we went
home and we cooked.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
And.
Speaker 6 (08:40):
I think we watched some TV and did some laundry,
and we fell asleep.
Speaker 2 (08:45):
I'd read him a story and he wasn't feeling really well,
and we fell asleep on the couch under the air conditioner,
and everything just seemed normal.
Speaker 6 (08:56):
You didn't realize that you were going to wake up
in your whole world would be turned upside down.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Yeah, I mean your whole world was really destroyed at
a time when the community and the system should have
been coming to help you in every conceivable way. Instead,
you were exposed to and victimized by the worst that
(09:23):
the system and our society has to offer. And it's
so important that you're here now because this arson quote
unquote science that they used in order to frame you
and wrongfully convict you for a crime that never even
happened is something that we need to focus on because
we need awareness among everyone because someday, you, the listener,
(09:45):
may find yourself on a jury and you may be
presented with this same sort of junk science.
Speaker 5 (09:52):
So fire investigation was an apprentice art. They were what
would were arded as common knowledge and industry standards that
were passed down from generation to generation. Virtually none of
those conventional wisdom were true, and when tested by scientific principles,
(10:17):
they were all debunked. Unfortunately, that came too late for Christine.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
And this starts with a fire investigator named Brian Frank.
Speaker 5 (10:28):
So what Frank did was the day of this fire,
and keep in mind this trailer was completely incinerated. He
comes into the trailer and just plucks things out of
thin air. He says, Oh, this, this is a burn
(10:48):
pattern on the floor. That's evidence of a liquid accelerant
by gasoline. Ooh, there's a V pattern on the wall.
That is, fire burns up in a V pattern. And therefore,
because there are two of these, there were two points
(11:09):
of origin. A normal accidental fire will have one point
of origin. Sometimes if a fire is intentionally set, it
will have two points of origin. Says Oops, here the
fire burned down. That is a sign of a liquid accelerant.
For all of these reasons, I conclude this was not
(11:32):
an accidental fire. This was intentionally set because, as you
said at the beginning, Jason, unlike many crimes like a
robbery or a fraud or a murder, the question in
an arson is was a crime even committed? And upon
that threshold question rests the lives of hundreds of people,
(11:57):
including Christine.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Here's what's at absolutely nuts is that to become a
licensed arson investigator, one who can testify in court, you
can take a forty hour correspondence course. It takes fifteen
hundred hours in some places. To become a manicurist. You
can't get a barber's license in less than six months.
(12:19):
The idea that they've been relying on these charlatans, you'd
be better off consulting with psychics or even just guessing.
And in Christine's case, there are so many other problems right,
there's a tunnel vision with holding of a sculpatory evidence,
there's multiple incompetent investigators who pass themselves off as experts,
and then it goes downhill from there. So there you
(12:43):
are outside the house and in minutes, in moments, your
life has gone from a good life, full of love
and hope to the worst imaginable scenario.
Speaker 6 (12:54):
You're just in shock, and you don't really believe what
people are telling you because they kept telling me, no,
you can't go in and know we couldn't get hit
him and know.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
He's not alive.
Speaker 6 (13:07):
And of course, as a parent, you don't want to
believe that.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
People on the outside want to look at it.
Speaker 6 (13:15):
And say, well, if this was done differently, or if
you had acted this way.
Speaker 4 (13:22):
And I mean, for myself, I have played.
Speaker 3 (13:26):
It over and over and over and over again in
my mind.
Speaker 6 (13:30):
I still every day that I wake up play it
over in my mind, and.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
I don't know how to come up with a different scenario.
When you're in that moment and the terror paralyzes you, you.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Don't know what you would do.
Speaker 6 (13:48):
So it's easy to stand outside and say this should
have never happened, and somebody has to be blamed.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
Right, because the alternative is incomprehensible to most people. Why
innocent baby would be taken from us? Christine? Six days
in hell? Right? Six days for you between the fire
and the loss of your child and the time that
you're arrested. What were those six days?
Speaker 7 (14:16):
Like?
Speaker 1 (14:16):
What were you doing?
Speaker 2 (14:18):
I went with my parents to play a funeral, and
my mom and dad really went through how the service
was going to be, and I just remember sitting there
and crying. And then I told him that I wanted
a song played something that I, you know, sang with Tony,
(14:42):
and he said, we can play whatever you want, and.
Speaker 8 (14:47):
Then I had to go get clothes to her to
a funeral. At that time, I was still walking around
barefoot because I'd literally lost everything, and everybody was trying to,
you know, comfort you and give you advice, and it just.
Speaker 4 (15:04):
Doesn't comfort you.
Speaker 2 (15:08):
So you feel more alone than ever because you don't
want to hurt their feelings, but everything they're saying to
you doesn't penetrate. The police didn't help because they followed
me everywhere I went and talked to everybody after I left,
(15:29):
and they even showed up and my son's funeral and burial.
Speaker 6 (15:35):
They came to me before I even got out of
the hospital and told me that it was an arson.
Speaker 4 (15:40):
They literally wanted a list.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
Of all my family and friends, anybody that could have
possibly done it.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Then they come back to me and say, no, you're
you're the person. You're under arrest for this.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
And in a small town, once.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
They make or arrest and put a headline on the
paper in a small community, in that community's mind, you're guilty.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
So now you're arrested. How long were you held before
the trial? Were you able to bail out?
Speaker 2 (16:12):
I was in there from July sixth to October. Mid October,
I bonded out on a fifty thousand dollars cash bond.
I tell my son Trent all the time that he's
the miracle that saved me. But when I got out,
I certainly didn't care if I lived or died, and
(16:33):
so I was drinking and doing a lot of self
medicating because I just didn't want to feel anymore. And
in the midst of that, I started getting sick and
that's when I discovered I was pregnant.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Yeah, and that's the worst possible scenario. Although now, as
you said, it turns out to be the thing that
saved you. And we'll get into more of that later.
But Ron, this trial is full of I mean again,
it's horseshit, the stuff that they were spewing from the stand.
Speaker 5 (17:12):
It began with the prosecutor standing in front of the
jury and saying, motive is not an element of the crime.
We don't have to prove motive. People tend not to
commit crimes for no reason. And of course they investigated
Christine and her motive for this crime, and they found
(17:35):
that she was a good, loving, caring, wonderful mother and
that she and Tony had a beautiful relationship. Everybody said
that universally, and so they're left with telling the jury, Okay,
Christine committed this horrific crime for no reason, but we
(17:59):
don't have to prove motive. Then their case depended one
hundred percent on this quote unquote expert testimony, because Christine
didn't set this fire. So of course, nobody saw her
set the fire, nobody saw her prepare to set the fire,
(18:19):
nobody heard her talk about setting the fire, nobody afterwards.
There was no physical evidence, no forensic evidence, nothing. Of course,
the trailer wasn't insured. She lost all of her possessions,
She lost, of course, the person who meant most to
her in the world. So they were left with this
(18:40):
expert testimony, these absurd fire investigation myths, which should have
and could have been dispelled by a defense attorney or
a competent defense expert. But there was something else that
was critical in this trial that would have been difficult
(19:01):
for a defense attorney to combat.
Speaker 1 (19:03):
And I have to tell the audience that this critical
evidence becomes just as important later to prove in Christine's
innocence as it was in getting her convicted. But go ahead, Ron.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
They took ten samples from the trailer, from the floor
of the trailer, from the carpet of the trailer, from
Christine's nightgown, and they tested it for various accelerants. There
was no gasoline. There was no inflammatory substance of any
(19:34):
kind on Christine's nightgown, even though they said that she
would splash this accelerant all around. But there were two
positive samples, and those samples, by the way, were given
to the Durea of alcohol to back on firearms atf
who federally investigates arson crimes and they have special laboratories,
(19:57):
and they did gas chromatizeography on these samples, and they
presented evidence at trial that there were two positive tests
for what they called a heavy petroleum distillate like jet
fuel or something else specifically not kerosene, and that was
(20:24):
found in the living room area and critically in the
front room, the room where Tony was found. Now, there
is reason for there to be kerosene in the living
room because the prior owners of this trailer testified that
they had a kerosene heater and that they overfilled it
(20:46):
from time to time. Kerosene does not evaporate, and so
even from years before, there would be kerosene in the wood.
But there's no explanation for a heavy petroleum distillate like
jet fuel. End there is absolutely no innocent explanation for
there to be a heavy petroleum distolate in the front
(21:09):
room Tony's bedroom, and that was critical evidence that was
not refuted by the defense attorney and on the strength
of that expert testimony of end these critical lab determinations.
Christine was convicted.
Speaker 1 (21:28):
March fourth, nineteen ninety six, twenty two years old. Pregnant
Christine is convicted of arson and murder. Less than a
month later, she's sentenced to two concurrent terms, sixty years
for murder and fifty years for arson. So how pregnant
were you, Christine at the time of this wrongful conviction?
(21:49):
And what the hell was it like giving birth behind bars?
Speaker 2 (21:54):
I was almost six months pregnant. The only thing they
don't do to pregnant women is make them wear the
belly chain and the box because the baby's not a prisoner.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
But with so many pregnant women in there.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
You don't always get soft cuffs for your feet. So
I've got deep scars on the back of my ankles
from wearing those metal shackles. And then when I finally
went into labor, I didn't really know that I was in.
Speaker 3 (22:30):
Labor because I was just having a backache.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
So they took me to the infirmary and couldn't find
a heartbeat. I lost it. I started, you know, screaming
at him, and so I was.
Speaker 6 (22:42):
Handcuffed and shackle and taken out into an ambulance, and
when I got to the hospital, a doctor come in
and explained that I was having contractions and that's why
they could hear the heartbeat. They determined that I was
going to have an emergency see section, so the handcuffs
and shackles came off and I got a metal cuff
on my ankle in the log chain. I got about
(23:07):
thirty six hours with Trent, and.
Speaker 2 (23:10):
Then I was transferred back to the facility and my
family took him home.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
The Pacers Foundation is a proud supporter of this episode
of Rawful Conviction and of the Last Mile organization, which
provides business and tech training to help incarcerated individuals successfully
and permanently re enter the workforce. The Pacers Foundation is
committed to improving the lives of Hoosiers across Indiana, supporting
organizations that are dedicated primarily to helping young people and students.
(23:44):
For more information on the work of the Pacers Foundation
or the Last Mile Program, visit Pacersfoundation dot org or
the Lastmile dot org. This episode is sponsored by AIG,
a leading global insurance company, Paul Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton and Garrison,
a leading international law firm. The AIG pro Bono program
(24:06):
provides free legal services and other support to many nonprofit
organizations and individuals most in need, and recently they announced
that working to reform the criminal justice system will become
a key pillar of the program's mission. Paul Weiss has
long had an unwavering commitment to providing impactful pro bono
legal assistance to the most vulnerable members of our society
(24:28):
and in support of the public interest, including extensive work
in the criminal justice area. So the good news is
that there is actually an equal or greater number of
heroes in this story than villains Betsy Marx, Hillary po Rix,
(24:48):
Jamie McAllister, and the other two actual fire scientists, John
Dehan and John Malouley, plus the electrical engineer Richard Hansen.
Then Karen Daniel and Jane Raley. Legends in the field
were on your side. And of course Ron himself, Ron Safer,
I mean, the fucking cavalry came in on this one, right.
(25:10):
Can you talk now about the process that led seventeen
years later to Christine finally coming home.
Speaker 5 (25:18):
Yes, Christine pursued this tirelessly against all odds, found a
wonderful local attorney, Hillary bo Rix, who believed in Christine
but really did not have the resources to take on
the awesome power of the state, and a supporter of
(25:39):
Christine wrote a letter to Northwestern Center on Wrongful Convictions,
and Jane Railey, along with Karen Daniel, took Christine's case
and they disassembled every piece of evidence the state put forward.
Karen and Jane assembled the world's experts on fire science,
(26:02):
not the myths of arson investigation, but on fire science,
to prove first that everything the state said was wrong,
and then second that Christine was innocent, not beyond a
reasonable doubt, beyond any doubt. So first they got a
former ATF agent and he testified that every one of
(26:26):
the myths that was used by the so called arson
investigator Brian Frank was wrong. A V pattern does not
indicate a point of origin. It indicates a point where
something burned against a wall. Fire burns down not because
of a liquid accelerant, but because it's seeking oxygen and
(26:47):
there was a hole in the trailer. So the burn
patterns that Frank says indicated that there was a liquid
accelerant have been disproved. Brian Frank said that the fire
was hotter because a liquid accelerant was used. That is
a myth. Controlled experiments prove that fire is no hotter. Indeed,
(27:10):
the heat depends on what is being burnt. So chemistry
physics disproved every one of the pieces of evidence. But
there was one more critical thing that Karen Daniel did
that was pivotal. She subpoened the underlying test data that
(27:31):
had been used by the ATF Lab and all of
the documents related to those tests, and what that found
was stunning. First, she got the actual gas chromatographs, so
the actual tests and contrary to his testimony, he did
(27:51):
test against the standard of kerosene, not a heavy distilla,
but kerosene. Then when you look at those actual tests data,
you find that yes, there was kerosene in the living
room where the kerosene heater had been years before. But
then you look at the sample from Tony's bedroom, the
(28:13):
sample that convicted Christine, and the test was negative for
any liquid accelerate, kerosene, heavy petroleum distillate, nothing. What's more,
in that file, there was a draft report that reflected
(28:34):
accurately the test results, that is that there had been
kerosene in the living room and that the sample in
Tony's bedroom was negative, and then there was a report
that in handwriting that crossed that out and made that
test result positive. How that happened, unfortunately, we'll never know
(28:57):
because by the time we got to the hearing, the
ATF agent, who has now deceased, was incompetent in an
assisted living home and could not testify about what happened.
But what was clear was Christine was convicted based on
(29:18):
not only faulty but false evidence. So that takes care
of the States case.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
So Christine's team exposed the junk science and the outright
falsification of the real scientific data that led to her conviction.
And by the way, these are your tax dollars at work.
And if you don't think this could happen to you, well,
don't even get me started. There's more to this, and
I'm talking about with the defenses expert Jamie McAllister testified
to about how the fire really started.
Speaker 5 (29:49):
Jamie McAllister, who is an expert in examining the victim's
chemistry and reverse engineering how a fire must have started,
testified about how this fire started. Tony died before the
fire got hot. He died of carbon monoxide poisoning. There
(30:10):
was no burning in his trachea, no burning in his lungs,
and so he had stopped breathing before the fire got hot.
His carboxy hemoglobin rate, which is what we referred to
as carbon monoxide poisoning. It's when the carbon monoxide bonds
with your blood. The hemoglobin was eighty percent. Fifty percent
(30:34):
is lethal. So how did it get that high? Well?
Jamie McAllister testifies that controlled experiment show that if the
fire had started out in the open air of the
living room or the bedroom, it would have produced a
lot of carbon dioxide to oxygen molecules. Because there's a
(30:55):
lot of air floating around and very little carbon monoxide
one oxygen molecule. It would have taken ninety minutes for
the fire to have produced enough carbon monoxide for Tony
to have gotten to a carboxy hemoglobin rate approaching eighty percent.
(31:17):
He would have burned to death long before that, and
of course his lungs in everything else would have burned.
That didn't happen. So how did this fire happen? Well,
as an electrician testified, there were electrical wires that were
overloaded that ran between the roof and the drop down
(31:40):
ceiling tiles. There was an electrical fire that started that morning.
But because there's limited oxygen there, what happens is the
fire smolders and it produces a lot of carbon monoxide
up in the ceiling. Now, eventually the fire gets hot
(32:01):
enough so that one of the ceiling tiles burns and
drops to the floor. That undoubtedly is what Christine awakens to. Now,
when that happens, the carbon monoxide fills the Tony's room
like a balloon that is letting out its air. Physical
tests and chemical tests prove within minutes he dies of
(32:26):
carbon monoxide poisoning. That's how this fire had to have happened.
And thus, not only was there no evidence that Christine
was guilty of an arson, there was conclusive evidence that
the fire was an accidental fire that took place in
(32:46):
the confined area of the ceiling, and that Tony died
as everybody knew, of carbon monoxide poisoning.
Speaker 1 (32:55):
But in spite of all of this, on June eighth
of twenty ten, now over four years after your conviction,
Judge Weshoffer denied you a new trial. He said, quote
while and this is a quote, while MSS Bunch had
new resources available to her at the post conviction hearing.
New experts do not create new evidence. The issues raised
(33:17):
and the conclusions reached, while packaged differently, remained basically the
same as they were at trial in nineteen ninety six
end quote. He went on to add that he did
not believe the ATF documents would have changed the outcome
of the trial. And I mean it was exposed that
they falsified the findings and said the samples were positive
(33:38):
when they weren't. What the actual fuck like And this again,
if you don't think this can happen to you, and
I'm talking to the audience now, of course you're wrong.
A very large percentage of judges are elected and the
others are appointed by elected officials. Either way, your decisions
in the voting booth are going to determine who ends
(34:00):
up on the bench. So and of my rant, back
to the story. Meanwhile, another Indianapolis lawyer joins the team,
John Larimore. And then we get to the good stuff.
Right On July thirteenth, twenty eleven, Ron who's here with
us now, argued in front of a three member panel
of the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Speaker 5 (34:22):
At the argument itself, it was very clear from the
questioning of the judges that one judge was dead set
against us. There was nothing I was going to be
able to say to change his mind. One judge was
for us, and no matter how incoherently I babbled, he
was going to vote for us. And so the middle judge,
(34:44):
the chief judge, held Christine's fate in her hand. Our
working theory and it made sense was that if the
court was going to reverse this conviction, they would have
done it right away because they know she's sitting in jail.
So we're sitting there understanding that the longer this goes on,
(35:05):
the more likely it is we lost. As time wore on,
despair grew.
Speaker 1 (35:12):
And eight of what must have been truly agonizing months later, Christine,
on March twenty first of twenty twelve, in a two
to one decision, the panel reversed the conviction and granted
you a new trial, citing the evolution of fire science
as well as the fact that the sculpatory evidence was
(35:32):
withheld that quote unquote directly contradicted ATF forensic analyst William
Kinnard's trial testimony. Christine, how did you find out about
this momentous decision.
Speaker 2 (35:44):
I got a call to come to the counselor's office
and my lawyers were on the phone.
Speaker 6 (35:49):
To tell me that they had reversed my conviction and
remanded for a new trial.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
I started crying, and I asked them if they called
my son.
Speaker 3 (36:00):
Him to know that I won and I was going.
Speaker 6 (36:03):
To come home, and so they assured me that yes,
they were calling him, and I ended up. I stayed
at the counselor's office for like an hour and a
half because I head back to back calls, and she said,
you know, she said, we're just gonna make this your day,
so everybody can call and congratulate you and tell you
(36:24):
the news.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
And they were just so happy for me.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
Ron, What about you? What's your recollection of that phone call?
Speaker 5 (36:31):
I cared beyond measure about Christine in this case and
getting her out of jail, and when it ultimately happened,
it was as if it was happening to my sister.
Just the most moving experience. Although the reality comes home
of Okay, she's not out of jail, she gets a
(36:55):
new trial, she's still sitting in jail. We got to
get her out of jail.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
So almost five months go by, after March twenty first,
twenty twelve, and the amazing phone call, all the way
to August eighth, when the Indiana Supreme Court left the
Appellate Court's decision undisturbed, and then finally about a month
after that, September one, twenty twelve, seventeen years, one month
and sixteen days after you were arrested, Christine, you were
(37:24):
finally released into the arms of your family. What was
that like?
Speaker 2 (37:28):
Well, I mean, when you first walk out, I think
all you're looking at is the dream finally happened.
Speaker 3 (37:35):
And I have so many possibilities.
Speaker 6 (37:39):
After that initial who wears off, then you're left with
all of these fears and insecurities. It was great walking
out and seeing everyone, but then you know, I'm facing
another murder trial, so we have to start prepared for that.
Speaker 3 (38:01):
And I have.
Speaker 6 (38:03):
You know, my son, who I have to provide a
home for, and I have to make sure that he
has everything he needs. He's just sixteen, so I don't
have a driver's license, I don't have any kind of ID,
I don't have Renner's history, credit score, all of these things.
Speaker 3 (38:20):
I don't even know where I'm going to get a job.
Speaker 6 (38:22):
After seventeen years, so fear starts to take you over,
and I think that at first, I was just like,
I'm not.
Speaker 3 (38:32):
Going to make it. There's no way I'm going to
be able to make it.
Speaker 6 (38:36):
And that first night, my son was showing me on
his laptop how to set up a Facebook account, and
while I'm looking at it, I see that he has
the appellate court site bookmarked.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
And I said, why do you have that?
Speaker 6 (38:53):
And he looked at me and he said, because I
checked every day to see if they made a decision and.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
You were come.
Speaker 4 (39:02):
And I started to crying and.
Speaker 2 (39:05):
I said, you know, I said, I've been so worried
and so unsure, but.
Speaker 4 (39:11):
Hearing that you believed in me and we're.
Speaker 6 (39:13):
Just waiting for me to come home, I can make
it through anything.
Speaker 1 (39:26):
Then another and a long line of amazing developments in
your case happened just before Christmas, which must have made
that time of year even sweeter. The prosecution finally came
around to their senses and dropped the charges, which brings
us to your next struggle, compensation for all that lost time,
And of course no amount of money can be enough
(39:48):
to repay what you lost, but you had an uphill
battle and a unique struggle just to even get compensation.
Can you fill us in on that.
Speaker 3 (39:55):
Yes, So, like everyone, I filed a civil suit.
Speaker 6 (40:00):
Clearly people are protected, so you have to break through
immunity to try to sue. The issue is the ATF
chemist is deceased, so I didn't have a lead to
stand on, and that was ultimately dismissed.
Speaker 4 (40:16):
Compensation.
Speaker 6 (40:17):
I have been working since I've been out, and well,
I've helped pass new legislation in three different states, working
with the Innocence Project. This past year, we passed compensation
in Indiana, and then when my civil suit was dismissed,
I applied for the compensation. You know, it was I think,
(40:39):
very surreal to receive a letter from them saying that
just because my conviction was reversed and I wasn't retried
did not mean that I was actually innocent. And it really,
I mean, it hurt my feelings.
Speaker 2 (40:52):
Because I testified before these legislators three separate occasions.
Speaker 4 (40:58):
The senators and representatives.
Speaker 6 (41:00):
That pass this bill used my case to pass this
compensation bill, and then you're going to basically retry me
all over again.
Speaker 1 (41:10):
So are they really trying to relitigate this case?
Speaker 2 (41:14):
No?
Speaker 3 (41:14):
They are not.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
But as you go through the process, you fill out
a compensation application and then they review it. So for them,
they reached out to the prosecutor, and the prosecutor said,
you know, no, we didn't have evidence at the time
to retry this, but you know, we aren't going to
say we made a mistake. They never want to say
(41:36):
they made a mistake. So I had to reach out
to everyone I knew, the Center on Wrongful Convictions with
you know, the amazing Laura and I writer and Steve Drisen,
Ron Safer and all of them wrote letters and submitted
the evidence that was used to.
Speaker 6 (41:55):
Exonerate me, in order to show them that I am
innocent and were of this conversation.
Speaker 3 (42:01):
Twenty five years after the fact.
Speaker 6 (42:04):
They are reviewing the application. They've been reviewing it since November.
Speaker 1 (42:09):
Yeah, well, let's hope they come to their senses and
come to the right decision, because I think the right
thing to do is clear to everyone who's listening and
to anyone with a heart and a soul. So let's
get to what you're doing now. You started an organization
called just is for just us.
Speaker 2 (42:27):
Just is just like it sounds, because the situation just
is and then it's for just Us, which means all
of us exoneries. Justice for just Us was started by
myself and another exonery that came from the Center on
Wrongful Convictions and Juana and I just basically wanted to
(42:47):
address what it was like because when people walk out,
you don't have a toothbrush, you don't have the basic necessities.
So j for Jay for short. You know, we're helping
with boxes.
Speaker 6 (42:58):
If somebody reaches out and says, hey, I need an outfit,
I need basic hygienes, we put that together. We've helped
take some axonneries to the Innocence Conference, sent out gas cards,
cash cards, we've paid rent, we've paid bills, and our
organization allows healthcare providers to donate services so they can
(43:19):
get a dental visit or some counseling sessions or a
physical things that are desperately needed when you return.
Speaker 1 (43:28):
It's such an important thing, you know. I've tried to
devote myself to doing as much as I can to
help people coming out of the system, because it's exactly
as you described. It's like I call it the second punishment,
and what I mean by that is most people coming
out have no support whatsoever. They may get forty dollars
and a bus ticket and then you know, not even
(43:49):
a good luck. So there are a number of wonderful
organizations doing this work, and I encourage everyone to support
just is for just Us. So please every scroll down
on the episode description and get involved with Justice for
just Us. And now this is the part of the show,
of course, that we call closing arguments. So first of all,
(44:10):
thank you to our phenomenal guest today. The closing argument
segment works like this, I turn off my microphone, kick
back on my chair, leave my headphones on. Sometimes I
close my eyes, and we're going to let each of
you have the final word on whatever you want to
talk about. So let's go to Ron first and then
Christine you can just take us out.
Speaker 5 (44:30):
Well, first of all, thanks so much Jason for telling
this story, for telling the other stories. It is so
critically important to raise public awareness of these wrongful convictions.
We have the best criminal justice system in the world,
but it is run by human beings, and human beings
(44:54):
are flawed. They make mistakes, They at times act in
intentionally maliciously. When that happens, it takes enormous resources to
get the system back on track, and so few people
are able to afford those resources or are given those resources.
(45:17):
So what has to happen is everybody involved in the system, prosecutors, judges,
jurors have to have an open mind. They have to
be persons of goodwill. We as citizens have to hold
(45:38):
them accountable that their jobs are not to get convictions,
their jobs are to do justice, and we have to
insist on that. We have to enter that jury box
as citizens, giving credence to the presumption of innocence that
our constitution requires. They're not words, they are a critical concept.
(46:04):
But if we don't pay attention to it, if we
don't honor it, then wonderful people like Christine will have
their lives robbed from them, losing decades that nobody can
give back to them. And so this is a call
to action. We have to be more active, We have
(46:29):
to be more responsible. We have to be accountable and
make sure that everybody in the system is accountable.
Speaker 6 (46:40):
Christine, when I go speak to the community and tell
them how they can help with j for Jay, or
how they can help the Innocence Project, or how they
can step up and make changes within our system, because
it is a great system.
Speaker 3 (46:58):
It is designed to work.
Speaker 6 (47:01):
And we have to take responsibility and make sure it works.
Speaker 3 (47:06):
So I know that everybody is sitting.
Speaker 6 (47:07):
There saying I don't have money to donate, but everybody
does have to step up and say I have something.
Speaker 3 (47:14):
To give here.
Speaker 2 (47:16):
I can vote, I can educate myself so that when
I'm sitting on a jury, I know what I'm listening
to because the CSI you watch on TV that's not
always accurate. So really learning about these issues, really raising
your voice and.
Speaker 3 (47:34):
Saying you know, we need to change some things. That's
how we make the world better.
Speaker 7 (47:40):
And I encourage all of you to learn about this
and figure out if you can help by voting, by
sharing our stories, by talking to an axonary, by just.
Speaker 1 (47:51):
Being there, don't forget to give us a fantastic you
wherever you get your podcasts, it really helps. And I'm
a proud donor to the Innocence Project, and I really
hope you'll join me in supporting this very important cause
and helping to prevent future wrongful convictions. Go to Innocence
(48:13):
Project dot org to learn how to donate and get involved.
I'd like to thank our production team, Connor Hall and
Kevin Wartis. The music in the show is by three
time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow
us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction and on Facebook at
Wrongful Conviction Podcast. Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flamm is a
production of Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal
(48:37):
Company Number one
Hosts And Creators
Lauren Bright Pacheco
Maggie Freleng
Jason Flom
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.