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