Hmmm, well, let's see here. On the one hand:
"Mr. Macumber’s former wife, now known as Carol Kempfert, said he was a dangerous sociopath who deserved to die in prison. She denied making up his confession and tampering with the evidence used to convict him.
It is her former husband, she said, who is a pathological liar. “I was in law enforcement for almost 20 years, and no one came close to being able to manipulate like Bill,” she said. “This man could sell water to a drowning person.”
In the course of a half-hour conversation, Ms. Kempfert accused Mr. Macumber of terrible and disturbing crimes beyond the killings in the desert. Asked if he deserved clemency, she said, “Absolutely not.”
“Actually,” she added, “I think he’s lucky. If he had been caught sooner, he would have gotten the death penalty.”
==
OK, that the cop's (ex-wife's) story, eh? What else?
"The jury did hear about two kinds of physical evidence — a partial palm print and bullet casings — that prosecutors said connected Mr. Macumber to the killings. " Hmm, physical evidence, eh? But, LOOKY HERE!:
“I can fully see how my mother could have set him up and framed him,” Mr. Kempfert said. “She had access to the evidence. She was doing fingerprint courses at the time.”
So the cop "coulda" framed him, eh? Was there ever a case where that wasn't a (at least theoretical) possibility? But this case is different, I spoze, cause the convict's own son thinks he coulda been framed.
