|
 |
 |
|
 On
January 7, 1994, a survey crew in Watauga County North Carolina
discovered the nude, partially decomposed body of a man in a wooded area
near the Blue Ridge Parkway. He had been shot twice in the head,
execution style. The victim was later identified as a Swedish
citizen by the name of Viktor Gunnarsson. Gunnarsson was reported
missing from his home in Salisbury, North Carolina on December 4, 1993.
In July 1997, L. C. Underwood, a former
Salisbury Police Officer was convicted of the Kidnapping and First
Degree Murder of Viktor Gunnarsson. In the following pages you will see
and hear the defendant’s side of this story, told in his own words and
supported by facts, evidence, and court transcripts. This is a side of
the story that has never been told, presented in court, or heard by a
jury.
In this documentary you will read about
overzealous investigators and prosecutors who:
q
Used the murder of Catherine Miller,
whose daughter was engaged to Underwood, against him even though no
evidence was presented that linked Underwood to her murder. No one has
ever been charged in the death of Mrs. Miller.
q
Allegedly found seventeen hairs on a
trunk mat taken from Underwood’s vehicle two years after it was placed
into evidence. The mat was meticulously and methodically searched
microscopically six or more times over a twenty two month period by a
forensic scientist, head of the Trace Evidence Section of the SBI, with
no results. When the mat was being packaged to send back to
investigators, these hairs were casually observed, all in one area of
the mat.
q
This same forensic scientist, in his
official laboratory report nine months prior to trial, stated that he
had turned the hairs over to the FBI for DNA testing 49 days before
they were allegedly found.
q
Evidence and prosecutions theory of the
crime presented at trial revealed that it was totally impossible for
Underwood to have committed the crimes in which he was charged.
You will
also see how defense attorneys:
q
Had never defended anyone in a First
Degree Murder case.
q
Failed to introduce a confession by
another individual who was never charged.
q
Failed to challenge the origin of the
forensic evidence presented by the prosecution.
q
Began reviewing evidence against
Underwood eleven days before trial.
q
Failed to uncover and present evidence
favorable to the defense.
q
Failed to challenge the origin of the
suspicious hair evidence presented by the prosecution at trial, even
though they felt the hairs were planted on the trunk mat.
|
