William Amor
Illinois
William Amor reacts to DuPage County Judge Liam Brennan's not-guilty verdict on Feb. 21, 2018, at the DuPage County Courthouse in Wheaton. (Naperville Community Television)
| Clifford Ward |
A former Naperville resident who spent two decades imprisoned for arson and murder in the death of his mother-in-law was acquitted of those crimes Wednesday by a DuPage County judge who called the case “fatally compromised.”
As Judge Liam Brennan was finishing reading his ruling in the retrial of William Amor, the defendant — aware he was about to be found not guilty — let his head drop and took off his glasses a moment later to wipe away tears. Lauren Kaeseberg, one Amor’s attorneys from the Illinois Innocence Project, who was seated next to Amor, quietly placed her hand on his back.
“I’ve always been hopeful. I’ve always thought essentially that the system would do the right thing,” Amor, 62, said afterward. “It’s unfortunate it took 22 years.”
Amor thanked Brennan, who vacated Amor’s 1997 murder conviction last year in the wake of advances in fire science that undercut his 1995 confession. Amor had been out on bond since May.
Following closing arguments earlier this month, Brennan set Wednesday for his ruling to give himself time to review evidence, which included testimony from three arson experts.
A prosecution expert had testified that he believed the Sept. 10, 1995, fire that killed Marianne Miceli, 40, was set using an open flame on a living room cloth chair. But the judge said that opinion presented a highly unlikely timeline of how the fire spread.
There was trial testimony that Amor and his wife, Tina Miceli, had left the condo where they lived with Marianne Miceli, about 20 minutes before Marianne Miceli called 911 to report the blaze. About a minute into the call, she was overcome by smoke.
Defense experts testified that an open flame fire would have created the smoky conditions in five minutes or less. The judge said he doubted that Marianne Miceli saw a fire and waited 15 minutes to call 911.
Brennan also said he was not convinced by a letter Amor had written to his wife in 1995, saying he had ideas for “capital gains” that would allow the couple to move out of the condo, and that he would discuss them with Tina Miceli. At trial, prosecutors called it evidence of Amor’s intent to murder Marianne Miceli for insurance, but the judge said didn’t believe Amor planned to talk with his wife about killing her mother.
“The state’s timeline and its theory of the case are fatally compromised,” the judge said.
Amor confessed in October 1995 to setting the fire, a confession that his attorneys argued was coerced by police. The Innocence Project attorneys said it was far more likely that careless smoking led to the fire. Marianne Miceli smoked two packs a day, and Amor and Tina Miceli also were smokers, according to testimony.
Amor’s confession came during a lengthy police interrogation during which detectives served him with divorce papers that his wife had just filed. Eventually, Amor said he started the fire with a cigarette and vodka-soaked newspaper.
He was found guilty at trial in 1997 and sentenced to 45 years in prison, but Brennan vacated his conviction last year after an evidentiary hearing at which experts testified it was scientifically impossible to start a fire in the way Amor described. The judge said that with the new fire knowledge undermining the confession, he did not have confidence in the conviction.
Prosecutors, though, opted to retry Amor.
State’s Attorney Robert Berlin issued a statement Wednesday saying his office respected the court’s decision, but he believed the evidence still supported a guilty verdict.
“This was a very complicated case originally based on fire science available at the time,” Berlin said. “Since that time, more than 20 years later, fire science has improved dramatically and consequently the evidence presented at this trial has changed from that presented in 1995.”
The Innocence Project said it believes Amor’s case is the first in Illinois where a court held that advances in fire science could be considered to meet the legal definition of “newly discovered evidence,” entitling a convicted person to a new trial.
“We have known for a long time that Bill is innocent and a terrible injustice occurred,” Kaeseberg said. “While it took far too long, we are thrilled by today’s verdict exonerating Bill. We look forward to seeing Bill live his life truly free after so long.”
Clifford Ward is a freelance reporter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
