The Matthew Eric Wrinkles Case

I was born in Evansville Indiana in a year in which I will not mention.  I moved away before I started school but returned to the area several decades later in 2014.  I have always had family in the area and tried to keep up with the news here often.  From time to time I would see stories on crimes that had happened at some point in time in the area.  Once I moved back and started looking into things a bit more it seems that there have been several high profile cases in the literal "tri-state area."  Some I had heard about, others I had not.  This is one that I knew a little about before I sat down today to do my research.  As I recall, although the crime happened in 1994, I likely first heard about it in 2009 when convicted murderer, Matthew Eric Wrinkles, was to make an appearance on The Oprah Winfrey Show a month prior to his scheduled execution.

As I sat down today and began my usual research as I do for each case, I expected this to be a fairly open and shut case and not one that I would struggle to tell or have difficulty expressing my opinion about.  It did not take long for me to quickly change my mind and discover that this case is one of those that I am unsettled with.  My indecision on just how I feel about this case is likely from lack of knowledge and I openly admit that.  This is why I feel like I have spent much more time than I normally would searching out information.  I thought my best source would be a local genealogy site that has compiled many newspaper articles over the years, especially in high profile cases.  Upon reading article after article, not only did I find myself confused, but I also felt myself becoming angry at things that were said in print only to be contradicted in a new article a few days later.  One of the best sources that I like to use when doing my research on a case is actual court documents and appeals. I always feel as if they not only give accurate facts but they are generally good about giving a good back ground story so when I found the appeals case for Matthew Wrinkles I was excited.  That excitement soon faltered as I began to read.  I have read many court documents, not just for cases for my blog but also as I attended pre-law school.  During that time I had access to an exclusive site in which court records were available for just about every case you can find. However, as I began reading the appeals record in this case I was astounded that the background information was not what I was used to and seemed to be overly condensed.  So in the end many of my questions went unanswered.

Before I dig into telling this story I want to point out that I do not necessarily consider myself an activist for or against the death penalty.  I do believe that there are times in which the death penalty is warranted but for me it must be reserved for the most heinous of crimes as well as there should be absolutely no doubt that the condemned committed the crime.  I do not believe as some that the death penalty is any sort of deterrent and I know for a fact that to house a death row prisoner, as well as the costs of their trials and appeals far outweigh those who are sentenced to life in prison.  But as I have heard that it is said in Texas... "Some people just need killin'"  So one would think that on the surface this case, one in which a man, admittedly on drugs, entered the home of his brother in law illegally and when he left his wife, her brother and her sister in law were dead while four young children remained alive in the home, I would be all for the death penalty. If we were just talking about what things look like on the surface, you would be correct.  But, I do not deal with just the surface.  I deal with all of the circumstances and all of the facts that I can find. I do not like to victim bash at all and I have to admit there was a time today in which I wondered if I could tell this story without a little of that.  This does not mean that I think anyone deserves to die in any manner but as a society we tend to think that when people die they were saints and angels and did nothing wrong...ever.  You know the saying about how we should not talk ill about the dead.  I do try to abide by that but I also believe that alive or dead people should be made to be responsible for their own actions.  That being said I will do my very best in telling this story in the best possible way that I can.

As I said before this case seems on the surface very cut and dry.  In the early morning hours of July 21, 1994, Matthew "Eric" Wrinkles, dressed in camouflage clothing and wearing camouflage make up on his face, entered the back door of his brother in law's home after he had cut the wires leading to their phone. Matthew's wife, Debra, had moved in with her brother, Mark "Tony" Fulkerson and his wife Natalie with her two children, Lindsay (14) and Seth (8) about a month prior.  Once inside the home it appears that Tony Fulkerson came out of his room holding a rifle to which Wrinkles shot him.  Hearing the gunshot from the room she was sharing with her children and her niece, Kimberly Fulkerson who was nine at the time, Debra came out wielding her own weapon, a .22 caliber handgun. As she yelled at Wrinkles she shot him in the arm.  He returned fire with the .357 he was holding and hit her in the upper shoulder. According to their daughter Lindsay she saw her parents each shoot each other as she screamed for them to stop.  She also says that as soon as Wrinkles shot his wife and she lay dying he ran to her side to attempt to resuscitate her, expressing remorse as he did so.  At some point Debra and Tony's nineteen year old niece, Tracey Hobgood, who was also living in the home and sleeping on the living room couch had awoken to gun fire and later stated that she and her aunt, Natalie Fulkerson were attempting to get out the door.  Natalie put herself between Tracey and Wrinkles and she was shot in the face.  Tracey ran from the home, later saying she never saw just exactly who was in the home, something Lindsay Wrinkles could not say.  In the end Tony Fulkerson was shot four times (chest, face, back and hip), while Debra was shot in the upper shoulder (the bullet traveling through her heart) and Natalie Fulkerson was shot on the left side of her face and lay on the front porch of the home.  Lindsay testified in court that when she made mention of calling the police Wrinkles ran. Considering the phone lines had been cut Lindsay had to leave the home, stating she went past her aunt who seemed to still be alive at that time, running to the house next door to call the police.  Tracey Hobgood in the meantime had ran to a home around the corner and had also been able to call 9-1-1.

While law enforcement and emergency responders were headed to the home, the three remaining children, Seth Wrinkles, Kimberly Fulkerson and three year old Matthew Fulkerson were huddled together in a corner likely too scared to move. Wrinkles had made his way back through the back door and the path he had taken through yards to get to the home to return to his vehicle.  He made his way to the home of one of his cousins in another town in the next county over. When he arrived there he had his gun and his knife on him and had a gunshot wound to his arm.  His cousin and her husband were able to easily get him to give up his weapons and for the next few hours as he tried telling some of his story they attempted to encourage him to turn himself into the police. After a few hours they turned on the radio and heard a news brief about the shooting. According to his cousin it was then that Wrinkles realized that Debra had died and seemed devastated. Failing to get him to turn himself into the police, but not feeling he was violent it was decided, or so Wrinkles thought, that his cousin's husband would take him to a friend's home.  A few seconds after they left the home Wrinkles cousin called the police and informed them where they were going and what vehicle they were in.  Wrinkles was arrested without incident.  He was taken to a local hospital to have his gunshot wound cared for and promptly taken to the county jail.

Almost immediately upon his arrest there was talk that it was likely that the prosecutor would seek the death penalty.  And, as in most cases such as this the media was all over it.  I found dozens and dozens of articles from the local newspaper.  It felt like in the beginning, then during his trial and then later through his execution there were times where there were multiple articles every day for several days. Because of the way I have it set up for that particular site I read a lot of them in reverse order.  It may have been because I read them this way that I was able to pick up some things more easily and noticed more so than I have in many cases just how misconstrued and misleading some of the articles were.  For example, one of the first articles after the shooting stated that officers were unsure just how many shots were fired by Wrinkles but they were sure it was more than six, which meant that he had re-loaded the gun at the scene.  In reality, only six shots were proven to be shot.... four to Tony Fulkerson, and one each to Debra Wrinkles and Natalie Fulkerson.  Now, before anyone jumps down my throat in saying that I am making excuses for Wrinkles, let me be clear that is not what I am doing.  However, when one hears that someone went into a home, emptied their gun, took the time to reload, and continues to shoot, we are left with a much different attitude about the crime. The same article also quoted an officer or a medical expect that it appeared that both women had been shot in the face and died immediately.  Well, only Natalie Fulkerson was shot in the face and Lindsay Wrinkles claims her aunt was alive when she left the home to get help.  These may seem like minor things to most, but when inaccuracies are reported they give potential jurors the wrong facts and ideas as to what happened.  Another article gave conflicting information about a previous incident involving Matthew and Debra Wrinkle than what was expressed, and proven, in court at his later trial.  So to be truthful, by the time I was done reading newspaper articles I was uncertain just what was fact and what was rumor.

The following are facts that I can confirm.  Debra Fulkerson and Matthew Wrinkles were married in 1980. Six years later when Debra's brother Mark married Natalie, Matthew Wrinkles was the best man. At some point in the next several years Matthew Wrinkles apparently became addicted to methamphetamines but I have been unable to determine just how much of an impact this was on their lives prior to Debra and Matthew's separation in June of 1994.  What we do know is that in the month preceding the crime alcohol and depression had also become a problem for him.  We also know that there was some sort of an incident in the Wrinkles home on May 3rd of that year.  I will get into that later however because there seem to be differing stories as to what occurred and what was believed.  What we do know about that day though is that Wrinkles was charged with criminal recklessness and those charges were still pending at the time of the murders.  We also know that sometime in mid to late June, Debra had moved into her brother's home with the couple's two children.  Then on June 30th Matthew Wrinkle filed for divorce, asking for a restraining order against Debra as well as custody of the children.  Debra also seems to have filed for a restraining order against Matthew on the very same day but I found no record to determine which of these were filed first. Near the beginning of July, Matthew's mother attempted to get him committed into a hospital to seek mental help.  She believed he was a harm to himself and others but she was told he did "not meet the criteria." His mother apparently did not necessarily take no for an answer and petitioned the court who ordered an involuntary stay for Matthew.  He apparently only spent three days there, it was later argued that he was only evaluated for approximately 45 minutes, and on July 12th he was released by a psychiatrist who determined that although he had drug issues and a "severe personality disorder" he was not "gravely disabled." 

We also know that on the day prior to the murders, July 20th, Debra and Matthew had a hearing with their attorney's (and presumably a judge) in which they both agreed to drop their respective restraining orders.  They agreed to allow Debra primary custody of the children with Matthew receiving "reasonable visitation." They also agreed that after not seeing his children since Debra had left their home a month prior that they would meet later that day at a fast food restaurant.   That meeting did not occur and was said to be what later sparked Matthew into using drugs and alcohol and heading to the Fulkerson home.  

Matthew Wrinkles trial began in May of 1995.  His lawyers had asked that the case be moved to another county due to the publicity but the judge delayed that ruling, saying they first needed to try and sit a jury.  This is apparently a phrase in which is used often in this area because I just recently heard this same ruling about a trial that is currently taking place in the area.  The prosecution was seeking the death penalty in this case.  It obviously qualified as one since there were multiple murders and they took place after he had illegally entered a home. As Wrinkles lawyers would say during the trial, there was no issue on who committed this crime, but there was question as to why and some questioned just how things happened.

As with most cases, the defense has their version and the prosecution has theirs and each side brings in their own witnesses to testify and each side of lawyers push their theory. Much of the time you discover that there is a little bit of truth on both sides.  While reading the theories, or sides in this case I saw very good points made from both the prosecution and the defense.  The prosecution argued that Matthew Wrinkles kicked down the door to the Fulkerson home, covered in camouflage after cutting the phone wires and just simply started shooting.  They contended that it was Wrinkles plan to go inside and murder his wife, and possibly her brother and sister in law.  The defense argued, and Wrinkles would testify, this was not his intention and that he only planned to go in and get his children, that he had been unable to see and take off with them, but that he had gone in prepared to do what he had to do that. The defense made a semi-good point when they pointed out that he had cut the phone wires before entering the home.  Their argument was that if it was his intention to kill why would he have to cut the phone wires, as dead people cannot make phone calls.  Now, of course one could just as quickly argue that he never had any intention of hurting any of the children in the home and by cutting the wires he was able to prevent one of the children from calling for help while he was inside but personally I am unsure that I believe he thought that far ahead.

The prosecution apparently spent a fair amount of time discussing the Wrinkles relationship and portraying Matthew as an abusive husband, although I will state here that no where in any of my research did I see anything saying that he was an abusive father, in fact it was contended that he was a very loving father to his children and cared for them very much.  Aside from incidences that the prosecutor attempted to use to portray Matthew as an abusive husband, and some claims by the media, the only other testimony I could find that seemed to confirm this came from Debra's mother and brother, although they did not seem to be specific.  The biggest incident that the prosecution wanted to use was an incident that had occurred in the Wrinkles home on the previous May 3rd. It was on that day that police were called and before it was over Matthew was arrested for criminal recklessness for shooting a gun.  Now, where everyone seems to differ is just what happened that day.  Media reports, after the murder, claim that Matthew and Debra had been fighting and that he had shot in her direction. The newspaper went on to claim to have a quote from the police report saying that Debra said she was scared and thought that if he got out of jail he would kill her.  However, firstly, it was Debra who bailed him out of jail the following day and it was Debra's voice from a deposition about the incident that was played by the defense at Matthew's trial.  In that deposition Debra claimed that on that May day, she and Matthew were having an argument over finances.  She says that she herself was "ranting and raving" and had walked out of the home and then she heard the sound of a gunshot.  She claimed she ran back into the house to ensure Matthew had not hurt himself and found he had shot into the floor.  She said she asked him why he did it and he said to end the argument. She also stated on this taped that was played that based on her own behavior that if she would have been him she would have shot her.  

Now I can so totally see an abused woman making excuses, we have seen it time and time again.  We have seen where women bail their men out of jail because they love them or because they fear that if they do not get them out, when they do get out they will come after them.  I could even see an abused woman taking the blame for setting her abuser off and saying she was "ranting and raving" as she did.  What I cannot see is a woman telling an officer that her behavior was so egregious that she all but deserved to be shot. One thing I did find confusing about this was that while this recorded statement was said to be from a deposition for the charges pending against Matthew, at the trial an officer involved with the case indicated that this statement, or at least one similar was told by Debra on that day but that he himself did not believe her and it was he that recommended the charges of criminal recklessness.  So the question lies with did the newspaper print it correctly when they stated the police report said that Debra was fearful of Matthew or did she tell the same story to the officer at the time of the incident? So, what really occurred that day will likely never truly be known.  I cannot say if more was made about that day than really happened due to the circumstances just a little over two months later or not. The only other thing I could determine about this day was that a friend of Debra's testified at trial that Debra had told her that Wrinkles had threatened her on that day and said if she ever left him he would kill her.  On appeal it was argued that this statement should not have been allowed in court as it was hearsay, the courts agreed with the defense but said it was not damaging enough to overturn the verdict.

There was something else that was pretty "hush hush" and seems was only mentioned in news articles because of the controversy surrounding it.  While preparing for trial the defense attorney's had learned that at some point (and I could never determine exactly when) Debra had sought some sort of treatment at a mental health facility.  It was mentioned that she had multiple sclerosis from a young age and had possibly suffered from mood swings.  Addiction to pain medication is also a common theme with sufferers although I must point out that I never specifically heard this charge.  At any rate the judge ordered the facility to release their records pertaining to Debra.  The controversy came because the facility not only failed to turn the records over, they just simply felt it best to ignore the order rather than address it and their concerns.  Typically, and appropriately it is their position to not release documents pertaining to patients. As the defense continue attempts to get them they were ignored. Finally at some point, just a few weeks before the trial was to commence, there was a hearing in which the judge gave the facility twenty-four hours to produce the documents or the person in charge of keeping the records would have an arrest warrant issue, and she was named specifically.  Through their lawyer the documents were produced and newspapers reported that after seeing them the judge deemed them relevant to the defense but did not release them to the public.  In all the articles I found at the time of the trial I never saw any mention to this particular subject so I am unsure what was found or if it was mentioned again.  In defense of the defense they had always said that their goal in this area was to simply see when Debra was treated and the reasons why in order to basically obtain the entire picture of things, or at least as much as they could.

It obviously did not take the jury very long to find Matthew Wrinkles guilty of murder.  They returned a verdict within two hours.  This was not surprising since it was openly admitted that he was responsible, even by his own lawyers. The defense had maintained that for them the case was more about stopping a sentence of death than the guilty verdict.  It took about twice that amount of time for the jury to recommend death for Wrinkles.  One of the most ardent people against a death sentence was Natalie Fulkerson's mother, Mary Winnecke. She argued that she was against the death penalty due to her faith and although she admitted that she struggled with that for a bit she knew she could not support that decision, even for the murderer of her daughter.  The Winnecke's were granted custody of the Fulkerson children and as the years went by their daughter, Kimberly also took this stance with her grandmother.  Mary Winnecke even sent a letter to the governor at the time, Mitch Daniels, asking for clemency for Wrinkles, something he himself had not even asked for.

I think one of the saddest things about this case is the lost victims.  In my opinion, despite three people losing their lives that early morning, the number one victims in this case were the four children that were left behind. Essentially on that day all four children each lost both of their parents..... three to death on that day and the other to death 15 years later when he was executed. The other lost victims were Mark and Natalie Fulkerson.  This was their home.  A man, although someone they knew, had entered that home that they shared with several children, including their young son who was sleeping with them, and despite any theories on what happened inside and how, they lost their lives.  But, because the focus was on the fact that Debra was murdered by her supposed abusive estranged husband it became a story of domestic violence. I am not necessarily saying that was not the case or that I fault anyone for feeling this way and even possibly bringing light to things, but still, in the shuffle the Fulkersons were often sidelined.  Many times they were simply referred to as Debra's brother and his wife. 

Over the next several years, while appeals were considered little was said about Matthew Wrinkle or his victims.  As I stated above the Winnecke's took in the Fulkerson children while the godmother of one of the Wrinkle's children (and her husband), who lived in Florida were granted custody of them.  While there were a few family members asking for custody of them the judge thought this couple was the best choice for a few reasons and the biggest was that they lived far away from Indiana and would have a better chance of moving past the incidents of that July day.  Wrinkles entered the news again just prior to his execution. In November of 2009 he, and members of his family as well as family members of his victims appeared on The Oprah Winfrey show.  It was here that at least Lindsay Wrinkles, Kimberly Fulkerson (both girls were married by now) and Mary Winnecke expressed their desire that the death sentence not be executed. Of course other family members who felt differently were also at the taping. Wrinkles was present through satellite during the show. Mae McIntyre (Debra and Tony's biological aunt but adoptive mother) expressed that while Wrinkles finally seemed to be remorseful and expressed that he was sorry to the family but she felt that it too late for that.  She was unsure, and we have to agree with her, if he was truly remorseful and always had been without expressing it or if the fear of his death was making him sound so.  She surely had a good point. On another point, that I and others would have to agree with, she seemed frustrated that Wrinkles was still attempting to blame his addiction to methamphetamines for the crime happening.  Matthew Eric Wrinkles was put to death by the state of Indiana on December 12, 2009 in Michigan City Indiana by lethal injection.

Do I believe this to be a horrible and obviously preventable crime? Absolutely! Do I believe that Matthew Eric Wrinkles deserved to be punished severely for his actions?  You bet.  Do I believe that Matthew Eric Wrinkles deserved the death penalty for his crimes?  That I am not so sure of.  For me to make that decision I need a lot more answers than I can find.  I am not saying that he did not qualify by law for the death penalty, that part is obvious.  I need to know that aside from the May 3rd incident on the Wrinkles home were there any other documented or absolutely known issues of violence.  While admittedly Kimberly Fulkerson was only 9 when her parents and aunt were gunned down in her home, she has stated that she had never seen Wrinkles act in this manner prior to this.  In fact, in all the statements I found from the Wrinkles daughter who was 14 at the time, I never saw a statement from her saying that she had witnessed other incidences.  I also need to know when this admitted addiction of his became an issue.  I need to know if the stress of the divorce (although he filed apparently a week after she moved from the home) had caused the addiction to begin, fester... get out of control... what? Aside from lay statement that abuse and control was present even those who's job it is to dig into things could only seem to come up with the May 3rd incident and even that is in question.  Are you telling me that in nearly 14 years of marriage there was nothing else reported or proven?  I also want to know who filed for a restraining order first on June 30, 1994.  Was the one that was filed second doing so simply in retaliation? But, truthfully what bothers me the most is the issue that made me question if I could adequately tell this story without appearing to victim bash. Again, I want to state that I do not believe any of the victims in this case deserved what they got, nor do I think Wrinkles was in any way right in his actions.  That being said I want to know more.... I want to know why Wrinkles was not allowed to see his children for over a month.... I want to know why on the day before the murders Debra agreed to meet him later for him to see the children and then did not show.  There were a few articles that stated Debra had decided not show because she was "too tired." A few indicated that prior to going to the Fulkerson home, as he stewed about this missed meeting with his children he attempted to speak to Debra but could not.  A friend of Mark Fulkerson's testified at trial that around 9:00 that evening Wrinkles had called the Fulkerson home and that angry words were exchanged between the two men but he did not know the specifics.  Was Wrinkles asking to talk to Debra or his children? Was Debra there at the time and simply avoiding his calls?  It was later claimed that while she had not shown up that day she had intended to take the children to see Wrinkles the following day but that she was planning to take someone with her as she supposedly feared being alone with him.  Those same people claim that she attempted to get a hold of Wrinkles to inform him of these new plans but could not reach him.  I question that.  I want to know what they each used or told a judge in order to get a restraining order against the other, orders that on July 20th they agreed to drop. I know from experience that when a marriage breaks down to the point of divorce that parties can get vindictive.  I also know from experience, and in Indiana no less, that when a restraining order is issued to a spouse that although the children are often considered a condition of that order judges want to know why the children should be kept from the other parent.  They want good reasons for this and encourage, or sternly question as in my case, if the other parent is being able to see the children.  As I previously stated there seemed to be absolutely no indication that Wrinkles was a bad father to his children or would have harmed them.  Now obviously we have the issue with the drugs that have been admitted to, however, again I have absolutely no idea when this became an issue and if it was one prior to Debra leaving the home. Matthew Wrinkles maintained from the beginning and until his death that his entire motive on that early morning was to see his children and he planned to kidnap them.  Now granted this was not a legal or good idea but was he pushed to this way of thinking? Even while behind bars Wrinkles attempted to get the courts to allow him to see his children.  This of course was denied considering that they children were expected (and Lindsay did) testify in court. Was this a case in which Debra took his children, was refusing him to see them (at the time of the murders it had been over a month), and it pushed him over the edge as he basically said?  Why did she agree to allow him to see him later that day on the 20th and then simply say she was "too tired" to do so?  One has to believe that when she agreed to this and to later use such a lame excuse to not follow through that she had no intentions of agreeing to this in the first place.  Would this have happened had she followed through with allowing him to see the children? Again, this is no excuse for his actions and in no way excuses him but it could shed light on his state of mind.  These are all questions that have bothered me about this case. I ask myself if this is a case in which a man was truly so desperate to see his children  that between drugs and possibly "game playing" he was pushed to this point? Was this same desperate man, who obviously did wrong, then sentenced to death for the core principal of wanting to see his children?  Wrinkles could have just as easily been sentenced to 180 years (60 years per murder served consecutively).  I truly do not know the answer to this.