A Cop Behind Bars

(CBS)  Patrick Bradford was once a proud police officer.

"There's no question I was exceptionally good at it," he says. "And it came naturally for me. And it was just like being right where you're supposed to be."

But today, Bradford is in prison serving 80 years for murdering his girlfriend, Tammy Lohr. In August 1992, she was stabbed repeatedly in her back and neck, before her body was set afire.

The crime rocked Evansville, Ind. Tammy, a 24-year-old civilian jailer, was attractive, energetic and popular. Bradford insists he had nothing to do with Tammy's murder. Susan Spencer reports on this tangled, tragic case.

At least one person believes him. Deborah Nolan, his close friend, is working to help overturn Bradford's 9-year-old conviction. His case has changed her life. At 34, she quit her teaching job to study law.

Their friendship goes back to childhood. "He stuck up for me a lot. And I just worshipped the ground he walked on when I was growing up," she says. He was the big brother she didn't have.

After high school, Nolan left town, got married and became a teacher. Bradford, meanwhile, joined the police. Guy Minnis, who trained 24-year-old Bradford back in 1986, thought his rookie charge had a promising career. "I thought he was a good, hard-nosed cop," he says.

Bradford was at police headquarters when he first met Tammy Lohr. Their friendship blossomed into a romance. But Bradford was married to his childhood sweetheart, Dawn, and they had two young children. He says he actually thought about leaving Dawn, but never quite could follow through.

On the night of Aug. 1, 1992, Bradford dropped by Tammy's house on his way to work. He then began his overnight shift. As usual, on his way home the next morning, he headed back to Tammy's house. Then, he says, he noticed something alarming: "There was smoke coming from under the eaves of the house.

He says he ran into the house. Crawling beneath the smoke, he says, he could see into Tammy's bedroom…

"I could see what looked like flames, arcing out from underneath where the bed would be. I felt it was pretty hopeless that she could survive that," he says.

He says he went no further. Once outside, Patrick radioed for help. Firemen quickly arrived, and when the blaze was out, made a grisly discovery. Tammy had been stabbed 21 times. Her body and bedroom had then been set ablaze with gasoline. In the living room, her dog lay stabbed to death as well.

That morning, Bradford gave a statement. Minnis was the lead detective on Tammy's case. Among the suspects was a former coworker of Tammy's, Finis Vincent, Jr. Tammy had complained about sexual comments Vincent had made and he partly blamed her for losing his job. Five months before, Tammy had reported seeing Vincent slouched in his car outside her home around 3 a.m.

Minnis and his partner visited Vincent, spoke to him briefly, and decided he was innocent.

Minnis also ruled out Bradford's wife, Dawn. "Tammy Lohr was an athlete; Dawn was very frail, very small," he says. "I don't think that she could handle Tammy with a hand grenade and a machine gun."

Minnis was reluctant to consider the other obvious suspect: Patrick Bradford.

Fire investigator Jesse Storey had no such qualms. Firemen had the fire out about eight minutes after Patrick called for help. Storey says the damage in the room showed him that the fire burned less than 10 minutes, start to finish. Therefore, Patrick had to have set it or he could tell us who did because he would have had to have been standing beside him.

The scene had no murder weapon.

But crime scene investigator Mike Ford says the scene itself implicated Bradford. It looked at first like a break-in - a window screen was cut, phone wires were severed, circuit breakers in the basement were thrown. But it was all a ruse, Ford says. He notes that a sinkful of dirty dishes just below the cut window screen had been left undisturbed. He believes the screen was cut from inside the house.

He thinks Bradford staged the break-in to mislead investigators. James Lofton, a neighbor, happened to see Bradford drive up to Tammy's. Lofton was walking his dog and he did report that Bradford was upset after the fire.

But Lofton didn't see the smoke Patrick claimed he saw when he first drove up. Says Minnis: "Granted, Mr. Lofton was an old man. But still, he didn't smell smoke, he didn't see smoke."

Minnis still could not believe Bradford could kill, and so was thrilled to discover that a security camera at a nearby bank had been rolling when Bradford's car drove by, just 65 seconds before he called for help. "I thought that, you know there's no way, there was no way at that time that he could do all this stuff in 65 seconds," Minnis says.

But then some investigators came up with a new theory: what if Bradford murdered Tammy the night before? Bradford had iron-clad alibis for almost every minute during his patrol that night. But there was one quiet hour, when his only call to base was to report seeing one George Russell, a man who had frequent run-ins with the law, in a seedy part of town. Russell later would deny being there.

Asked about this, Bradford laughs: "Just the idea that a police officer who works the inner city would be dependent upon one of the people that he runs into, has arrested twice, suddenly be dependent on him for his alibi, it's just…"

If Bradford did murder Lohr during the night, detectives reasoned, then all he did in the morning was set the fire. So the question became, was 65 seconds enough time to do just that? Minnis did a timing test. It took him exactly 65 seconds.

What Happens? Part 2: The Trial, And The Experiment

[maiti_solares]

I saw this case in the morning and I felt that is something wrong in this case, many thing that doesn't match, it is a lot of evidence to me, to said they have the wrong man.
the fireman said the door was open and in the trail, he said no
Russell said he saw him the night and then he said no, he was in his brother party, the brother said no, he wasn't after testified, all of his court activity CEASED, and a serious felony charge was dropped with no explanation.
the man who was in the accident at 12:10 said, he was polite, and he wasn't nervous come on, something does make any sense!!!!

[maiti_solares]

Why?? this is my question
this is a terrible mistake, somebody else is outside having fun and this innocent man is paying for one only reason, cheat on his wife, not even cheat, because she knows about Tammy.

*tuned over his uniform to be examined for evidence

*Lab testing revealed neither blood nor gasoline on Patrick, his patrol car, his own car, or his uniform. No murder weapon was ever recovered. Patrick had no motive - his wife knew about the affair, and he had been seeing Tammy for almost four years. Tammy was the love of his life.

*Why the witnesses who testified contrary to their earlier sworn statements?

*why "White Boy" Russell,said Russell said that he had been out driving in the area at the time and in the place that Patrick said he had been driving. At trial, Russell testified that he had been inside all night long at his brother's birthday party. and the brother said no, and police believes in his word and Once Russell testified, all of his court activity CEASED, and a serious felony charge was dropped with no explanation.

* Patrick's recall of a peculiar accident scene, at 12:10 a.m miles away from the crime, which he was able to diagram perfectly. (Patrick's family, after the trial, tracked down a witness at that scene who identified Patrick as an officer he had seen at that accident. That witness' identity was not made known to the defense attorneys as the law requires.)
This man testified that Patrick was relaxed, polite, and "friendlier than the other officers." In fact every witness, whether for the State or the Defense, testified that Patrick behaved normally that evening: very professional, neat, and not disturbed or preoccupied.

*the police destroyed it by negligence. By failing to properly handle (refrigerate) the dog, police spoiled the most important physical evidence: his body could have pinpointed the time of death for both of them.

*window screen was cut, phone wires were severed, circuit breakers in the basement were thrown.

*security camera at a nearby bank had been rolling when Bradford's car drove by, just 65 seconds before he called for help

*what if Bradford murdered Tammy the night before? somebody saw the light on, after 12:30 to 2:00a.m, than who turn the light off, if Bradford was working at the time??

*66 seconds it is not enought time, to people seen the smoke, miles away, in a forest place, it needs more time.

*He was actually the second person to notice the smoke: a newspaper carrier told his wife, then police, that he smelled smoke as he crossed Tammy's lawn, several minutes before Patrick arrived.)

this man Vincent, was angry because he got fired because her, she saw him, slouched in his car outside her home, he was left his house at 5:30 a.m-7:00a.m that doesn't mean he is innocent?? he could said whatever time he wants but does mean he is innocent, and the police decided he was innocent??? he had many reason to do it, Bradford non.

There is no way he did that
Why??? this is my question???