The Murder of Corinna Mullen

When the channel Investigative Discovery first came out it was, and remains my favorite station to watch.  Over the years I have changed cable companies and as it often happens it always seems that the next level of packages that they offer seem to only have a channel or two that you would care to watch and does not seem worth the many extra dollars that it costs so currently I do not have it. However, a few months ago I was given a free month and I am surprised that my DVR did not burn up with the literally hundreds of hours that I taped from that channel alone.  I spent that month, and the next trying to catch up and watch everything and when I found one with an interesting story I made a note of it so that I could research it more and possibly blog about it here.  This was one such story.

It is not uncommon that I watch a television show based on a true crime and find that so much of the story was left out or sometimes it seems even fictionalized.  While admittedly it often happens that by the time I start my research on a case I have often forgotten much of the prior information that led me to intend to search, I feel as if this case left quite a bit out, or at the very least seemed to take everything on it's surface.  Then again, it seems that the investigators and the courts did the same so how can the show be faulted? When I do a blog it generally takes me at least a day to gather all the evidence and make my notes and then start putting it together.  For the most part this case seemed to be rather cut and dry, or so I thought when I first got into the story.  I had done my research and I sat down to compile the story. But, the more I typed, and as a reader you know I have the ability to ramble, the more things just did not sit well with me.  I had to walk away from it for the day as I felt as if I was swimming in questions.  By the time I walked away I had compiled most of the story and it likely would not have taken me long to come here today and finish and publish it.  However, this case sat heavily with me and when I sat in front of my computer this morning I erased all that I had written already.  This happens in very few cases.  I always try to get the facts as accurate as I can make them, and when I have questions, I pose them.  If I believe that  a case has been mishandled, I have no qualms in stating so.  If I believe a guilty person has been set free, I let that be known. In the same respect if I wonder how in the world a prosecution was able to obtain a conviction on the evidence I will also state that.  I think what bothers me most about this case is there just seems to be too many holes and questions that I could not find the answers to. 

In October 1987 after the body of Corinna Mullen was found mutilated in the trunk of her own car in a municipal garage in Central City Kentucky it seems that it appeared to be rather cut and dry.  Her boyfriend, Jimmie Royce Springer was quickly arrested and charged.  He faced a jury in July of 1988.  It was apparently a short trial and the jury took one hour to deliberate before they returned with a not guilty verdict.  The interesting part is that as far as Springer's arrest and his trial, this is really all I can tell you.  There is very little information about this part.  It was not until 2006 when initially three (later two more) people were charged with her murder and one of those people was Billy Fields.  Billy Fields is what makes this case "sensational."  In 1987 he worked for the police department in Central City; he was the first responding officer to the scene and at some point he was in charge of the investigation.  Even still some of the specifics of just what all the evidence was that was used to charge Fields and the others is missing from news articles and websites.  I eventually obtained much more information based on the appeals papers filed by defendants. And then there's little to nothing more again, even against defendants that were tried later.  It is almost as if Billy Fields would not have been an officer, giving the case that extra twist of a factor that this case would likely have not really been heard about.  The scary part of that is this is how innocent people are put in jail and often convicted, because no one hears about it.  Now, that is not to say that I find that to be the case in this situation but I have to be honest in saying that I am unsure one way or another.

Eventually, former Lt. Billy Fields, Jimmie Cramer and Jeff Boyd were charged with murder, first degree rape and kidnapping and in their 2008 joint trial they were found guilty, with the exception of Cramer being guilty of 1st degree manslaughter as opposed to murder and Fields was additionally found guilty of the charges of sodomy and tampering with evidence.  Later apparently Corinna's roommate, Angela Smith faced charged of complicity as well as perjury charges stemming from her testimony in Springer's 1988 trial (although I have absolutely no idea how or on what basis) .  Springer was also again charged, however due to double jeopardy rules he could not be charged with murder but was to also face charges of complicity to rape and perjury charges from his trial.  Again, I was never able to find out the basis for the perjury charges nor was I able to officially determine the results of these charges against Smith and Springer.  I have been led to believe through a few things that Smith may have received probation and that Springer was again acquitted, but I cannot officially confirm this. 

What I do know is that no-one in this case, sadly probably not even the victim, were up for citizen of the year award.  Cramer, Springer, and Boyd seem to all be pretty well known to law enforcement, especially when it comes to drugs.  Boyd has been accused of rape in the past and Springer apparently has a tendency to make jail, usually resulting from cultivating marijuana, his second home.  It seems too that Fields, even when on the force, was playing the "Good Ol Boy System" and was likely more brash and egotistic, let alone on the fence when it came to crime, than your average police officer.  Mullen's lived with Smith and it seems dated and had a relationship with both Springer and Fields, yet all six of them were good friends.  According to Corinna's dad, the twenty year old had been sharing her apartment with Smith for only about 6 months and had decided it was not working out and was beginning to move her things back into his home.  On the night of her murder her parents were watching her two year old daughter.  

I have often said that it seems that no bad people ever die.  What I mean by that is that is seems that when someone dies, no matter the manner, suddenly it seems that they never did anything bad in their lives.  This does not mean that anyone deserves to have their life taken but I believe that in life, as well as death, we remain responsible for our actions and choices.   Our actions, choices and our flaws often shape who we are but they can also sometimes put us in situations in which we should avoid.  Again, I want to make it clear that no one deserves to have their life taken and this is true of Corinna Mullen, but not only is it obvious she was at the very least hanging out with some unsavory people, she also had at least one issue when it came to the law.  I believe it was in the appeals record that I obtained the information that she first became associated with Fields after receiving either probation or community service after being caught shoplifting baby items, presumably for her own child.  It was also in that record that it was mentioned that she was seeing or involved with both Springer and Fields. There was speculation and rumor apparently that she either was or falsely indicated that she was pregnant and that Fields may have been the father.  I will go more into this part later on but I found nothing credible stating she she was pregnant at the time of her death or that she had even falsely stated so.  All of the parties involved, except for Fields, ranged between the ages of nineteen and their early twenties.  Fields was actually twice their ages, so was he friends with them because he too was into the drug dealing that some of the others were?  I cannot accurately answer that, but that is just one of the many answers I would like to know about the case and the participants.

So at any rate after Springer was acquitted in 1988 it seems that the case all but waned and went cold.  Central City is not a big town so while officially little was going on in the case, rumors were flying just as they always seem to do in small towns.  By 2006 when arrests were made Corinna's father was quoted as saying that he had heard all of the names associated with his daughters death except for Jeff Boyd.  This included the name of Billy Fields which kind of tells us that he did not have the best of reputations as an officer.  By the time the articles came out about the arrests he was referred to as "former officer" but just as with so many other things in this case I was unable to determine how, when or why this was the case.  Was he no longer an officer because he had been hurt?  Had he been fired?  Had he resigned?  I cannot answer that question.  

What I can say is that in 2006 a Kentucky State Police detective received a call from a Samantha Robinson who said she had information about this case, as she had witnessed the murder of Corinna.  Her name was forwarded to Detective Damon Fleming who had just recently been put back on the case to look into it.  Boy did Robinson have a story to tell Fleming!  I play to take her story piece by piece here in just a bit and examine it but according to Fleming, based on her information he obtain enough information to procure arrests and move the case forward.  Robinson was the key and star witness at the trial.  As often happens in cases in which there are several defendants, the state wanted to try all five defendants together.  The defendants of course wanted separate trials.  The court eventually ruled that Smith and Springer were entitled to separate trials but since, aside from a few extra against Fields, the other three defendants were facing the same charges from the same incident they would have a joint trial.  Per usual they all used this issue when they filed for their appeals after their convictions.  I found their appeal "answer" a bit different than most since the court decided to combine their rulings with all of the defendants, answering each issue.  The courts up held the convictions as well as found any issues the defendants brought up were technically non issues involving the conclusion of the jury.  The only one that I personally thought was a bit "iffy" was one that Fields brought to the table.  At the trial it was maintained that he was very close friends with the other defendants and indicated that he was less than stellar when it came to his job as an officer.  Fields wanted to argue and show differently by allowing the jury to know that at some point he had arrested Jeff Boyd on suspicion of rape.  The court did not allow this based on the issue that to say that Boyd had been arrested at some point could have prejudiced the jury against him.  Fields may have had a point but, in the same respect, if we are to believe other things the prosecution had stated about Fields and his actions as a police officer, then it could have potentially opened a huge can of worms to determine if the arrest was not something that was planned and set up.  I assume that Boyd was never convicted of the said rape since the filing stated "suspicion" so the court was correct that it could have been prejudice against him and it also could have skewed the trial in a direction it did not need to go into.  That being said the courts upheld the convictions and the sentences.  In the end Boyd and Fields received life sentences and Cramer (not convicted of 1st degree murder but 1st degree manslaughter) received a sentence of 60 years.  

So, just what was the evidence that they had against these men and what did happen the night Corinna Mullen was murdered?  As I stated above, the main, key evidence against the defendants was the statement and testimony of Samantha Robinson, first reported to officers in 2006, some 19 years after the crime.  In 1987 Robinson was only 16 years old.  She stated in 2006 that on the night of October 1, 1987 she was in her yard (although, keep in mind I am unsure if "her" yard indicated the same home in which her mother lived), late at night and she was abducted by two men that at the time she had no idea who they were.  She apparently at some point in the proceeding decades, in one way or another determined that the two men were Billy Fields and Jeff Boyd.  She says that they forced her into their vehicle and took her to the apartment that Corinna shared with Angela Smith.  Once inside she was met with two more men she did not know (presumably Springer and Cramer) and two women, Corinna and Smith.  Apparently soon after arriving Fields and Corinna began arguing.  They then took the argument into the bedroom in which Boyd forced her to follow.  Once inside the bedroom, and as they were arguing Robinson said Fields began beating Corinna.  The beating stopped for a bit while each of the four men proceeded to rape her and then Fields began beating and stabbing Corinna.  At this point Robinson claimed that she did not know if Corinna was dead or simply unconscious but she was placed in the trunk of her own car and one of the men demanded that Robinson drive the car to the municipal parking garage.  She says she got to the garage it was around daylight and that Boyd was already there.  She stated that when she got out of the car she fled and ran to her mothers house.  She stated she told her mother what had happened and that neither of them called the police. The following morning a worker at the garage spotted Corinna's car and saw blood was on it and called the police.  Billy Fields was one, if not the, of the first responding officers and in charge of collecting evidence.  There was at least a time in which he was considered to be the officer in charge of the case. 

Before I go into breaking down Robinson's statement I want to give you the theory, or theories, given by the prosecution.  I am not sure how to describe their tactic in this case as anything thing other than amateurish.  We all know that a prosecutor does not have to give a jury a motive as to why a crime was committed, but we also know that jury's tend to want one, and they prefer to have a solid one.  So generally when a prosecution builds their case they decide on a motive and they all but pound that motive in.  Is it always the correct motive?  Who knows. But for instances when there are cases in which the defendant benefited financially through insurance or other means the prosecution will settle that as the motive and continually bring that up in a trial.  That was not the case here.  First it seems they never settled on one theory or motive and secondly, although admittedly it may be because there was little written as the trial went on, it does not appear that they pushed any of them from my perspective.  In this case the prosecution had three theories as to motive.....

1) Sometime prior to the murder apparently Corinna had gone to the police station and filed a report with an Officer Scott stating that Boyd, Springer and another man were involved in criminal drug activity and stolen property.  It was said that Scott in turn told Fields about the report and it was theorized that she was murdered because of this.

2) Since it seems that drugs were very prevalent in the lives of most of those involved it was theorized that Corinna had owed one or more of the parties money for drugs and she was killed for this.  One witness testified to supposedly seeing Boyd with a gun in Corinna's face the day of or before her death and heard him say "You owe us. Pay or die."

3) It was said that Corinna was involved with both Fields and Springer prior to her death.  There was a speculation or statement that she may have falsely stated she was pregnant and claimed that Fields was the father.

Of the three theories, it is my opinion that the first one could have been the most easy to prove.  If in fact she made the report there should have been evidence of such as well as testimony from Scott that he had told Fields, if in fact, Scott was willing to do so.   When it comes to the second theory I am almost left laughing.  First off, the quote by the witness sounds ridiculous.  Who really says that?  Secondly, while yes it appears the people she associated with were in the business of drugs, although marijuana was the only one I ever saw mentioned, there was never an indication that she herself was into drugs.  If she was so into them that it caused her death there would have likely been a report finding them in her system, which I never found. And, if she was so much into drugs why would she have gone and reported those guys?  You do not turn in your dealers, especially if you are still a user.  Then you have the third theory.  I find this one odd.  I was unable to determine if this was even a credible option.  Nothing indicated that Corinna was pregnant at the time of her death and it appeared that the claim of her falsely saying this to Fields was a rumor at best.  However, it does appear that the prosecution did attempt to bring this theory up another time within the trial.  When Samantha Robinson testified that Fields and Corinna were arguing in the apartment she claimed to not know what it was they were arguing about.  However, the prosecution seemed to attempt to lead her by asking her if they could have been arguing about the pregnancy issue and she made a half hearted attempt to say it could have been.  Presumably this would have been the theory the prosecution wanted since according to Robinson, Fields did the actions that resulted in Corinna's death.

So let's once again go back to Samantha Robinson's statement that was key in the arrests and convictions of those the state say were responsible for the Corinna Mullen's death.  She starts with being abducted by two men that she did not know while being in her front yard.  I was unable to find out anything concrete and personal about her so I do not know if she had any older siblings.  This would be interesting to know because she was not much younger than most of the players, including Corinna, involved.  I also could not determine if she was born and raised in the area or how long she had been there.  For me this is also key considering this is a very small town.  It is one of those towns where everyone knows everyone or knows someone who does know someone, and if they do not know them personally, they have heard about them.  However, by her statement two strangers abducted a random teenager from her yard (again unable to determine if this is a home she shared with her mother).  She then says she's forced into an apartment where there are several other people that she does not know.  She never claims that she was physically or sexually abused by any of them.  The most she would state was that she was "forced" to do things but she never seemed to indicate what exactly that meant.  There never seemed to be a claim that for instance the knife she claims Fields used on Corinna was used to "force" her into their vehicle, or into the apartment, or into the bedroom or even to drive Corinna's car to the parking garage.  Her next statement that seems odd to me is that she claims Fields and Corinna began arguing soon after they got to the apartment and it continued in the bedroom that she was "forced" into and yet she was not able to tell what it was they were arguing about. She then went on with meticulous detail and in what order things were done to Corinna.  She then said she watched as these men put Corinna in the trunk of her own car, not knowing if Corinna was alive or dead and she was "forced" to drive the car to the garage.  She never indicates that any of the participants in the events she claimed happened rode with her or at the very least followed her in another car.  She then says she gets to the garage at near daylight and Boyd is already there and she is able to run and flee to her mother's home.  She never claims that she was followed, she never claims that in the 19 years that followed that she was threatened in any way.  She never truly states why the police were not notified by either she or her mother after the incident.  I suppose that we are to presume that it was not reported out of fear.  However, while I agree, if the incident happened the way in which she described there would be a certain amount of fear but again, she claims to have not known who anyone was involved nor does she indicate that she knew any of them were involved in law enforcement.  At the very least if my daughter comes home at dawn and has been gone all night and tells the tale she later told the court the police would have been called.  Then again, why was a 16 year old out all night and apparently no one was out looking for her.   

The biggest problem that I have with this I suppose is how you look at it from the criminals side.  You have a random teenager who is abducted in her yard by two strangers and then taken to a home in which she is forced to watch the beating, rape and murder of another person, yet she is not touched in any way.  She is then forced to drive the car with the victim in the truck and allowed to easily escape just after.  You then have one of the supposed perpetrators being the first officer on the scene supposedly gathering evidence and this random teens fingerprints are never discovered?  The supposed crooked cop does not attempt to set her up as being implicated and allows his friend, despite being the boyfriend of the victim, to risk taking the fall?  On top of this the supposed strangers know at least one residence that the teen lives at and seeing as one of the men was an officer if they truly did not know who she was they could have easily found out and made threats to make sure she kept her mouth shut, and yet none of that is alleged.  The story just simply does not make sense to me and it is this story that the prosecution seems to have bought and attempted to construct their case around.  They supposedly found at least two witnesses who claim to have seen at least Boyd and Fields near the parking garage but one says they saw them around 1 am and the other around 3.  Robinson says that the car was brought there around daylight which would mean closer to 6-7 am.  As I recall she was supposedly taken from her yard around 11:30pm to midnight and her story does not include any time in which she is not in the presence of at least Fields except possibly when she was driving the vehicle.  As far as Boyd, the only other indication she did not see him the entire time was when she stated he was already at the garage when she got there, indicating that he somehow left the apartment just before she had.

At trial all of the defense attorneys spent a lot of time trying to discredit Robinson and all but came right out and said she was a liar.  It seems the only real part of her story that they in a round about way addressed was the issue of rape. Now of course Fields was also charged with tampering of evidence.  The claim was as the first responding officer and the one in charge of the case he had manipulated and or purposely lost evidence.  All the men were charged with 1st degree rape and yet every one of their attorneys claimed that this was a false charge because there was absolutely no evidence of rape.  It was evident apparently that Corinna's vaginal area was cut and lacerated however, the indications that I got through my research was that these injuries were likely caused by a knife.  I never found anything, even in the appeal conclusion that truly addressed sexual assault, aside from the statement by Robinson.  If in fact, the victim was raped this would have been in the ME report.  Granted that this was a time just prior to DNA testing but I found nothing that stated semen was found, which could have at the very least been blood typed at that time.  By all indications no forensics were used in this trial and it appears that the absence of such was blamed on Fields tampering with the evidence, to which he was also convicted.  I do not totally dismiss this theory as being plausible although I heard of nothing specific that he was supposedly involved with tampering but again there would have to be some independent reports that he would not be able to destroy completely.  In the end it appears that the jury believed the story the prosecution, more specifically Robinson gave, as they convicted Fields, Boyd and Cramer.

I attempted to do some more searching not just on this specific case, but also the people involved and I came up with very little more than rumors and speculation.  There was a "Topix" page from the area where is was mentioned that "Samantha Robinson" was arrested "again" for drugs.  I could not conclusively determine that this is the same Samantha Robinson but it was implied. In fact someone with that name posted defending themselves but also affirming that drugs had been a constant struggle in her life. Despite having complete confirmation on this I want to mention this because I do feel that drugs were likely more, if not differently, involved in this case than portrayed. It was also on a similar page where I found that Jimmie Royce Springer (who I did confirm has continued to be in and out of jail on drug related charges) was probably acquitted again for the charges he faced the second time regarding this case and that Angela Smith received probation for hers.  Again, nothing was found specifically on what or how those charges came about, or referred to or even for absolute certain what the outcome was.

It seems to me something was definitely going on in that town and many today still claim that the town is corrupt.  However, giving a little benefit of the doubt, I have lived in a very small town before and this seems to be a reoccurring theme throughout them, whether  they are justified or not.  I am unsure, especially after reading the appeals record that affirmed the convictions, just what was really used to convict these men.  In today's world juries generally want some clear cut forensic evidence and sometimes they want way more than necessarily and it truly seems like these men were convicted on the word of a woman who was 16 at the time of the crime and waited nearly 20 years to tell the story.  At the very least if we believe the portions involving the beating and murder of Corinna, you have to realize that not everything she said could have or would have happened the way she said.  Robinson was almost undeniably absolutely more involved than she said.  I do not believe that she was abducted by two strangers, and I am pretty certain I do not believe she was abducted at all.  I think she knew at least one if not more of the people that were involved and I would not be the least surprised to find out they were all friends and were on drugs when things went awry.  I cannot say why she came out so many years later and told the story unless she was having a moment of clarity in her life and was feeling guilt but decided to down play her role.  I do not know if I believe her story that Fields and Mullins were fighting, but if in fact they were there is no absolute way, absent she being high on drugs, that she did not know what it was about considering it happened the same rooms she was in. Not to mention she cannot remember what they were arguing about but could establish a play by play as to how and what happened and in what order it happened the rest of the evening.  

I do question why this 40 something year old man (Fields) was so buddy buddy with all these people that were no older that early 20's and hanging with them so much if there was not some kind of illegal activity they were involved with together.  I also question why Corinna would be "involved" with Fields, a man twice her age, and yet it said she was the girlfriend of his friend, Springer.  It seems that upon his arrest Cramer was very, very vocal in his innocence, asking for DNA and lie detector tests.  Of course this alone does not make him innocent as plenty of guilty people say this but it seems like a huge stretch from small town marijuana drug dealers who has a buddy on the police force to murder.  If it was so easy for Fields to cover up and manipulate a murder how would it not be that much more easier to keep his friends out of jail or at least not convicted for much lesser crimes? This case would not be in the public eye at all if Fields was not a police officer. He probably had his hand in a lot of things, he likely did some intimidating but I am unsure that any of them had a hand in rape and murder and if they did, it surely did not happen the way the story was told.