More than 3,200,000 pageviews from 150 countries


Friday, January 15, 2016

The Camia Gamet Murder Case: Marcel Hill's Violent Life and Brutal Death

     In 2013, 30-year-old Marcel Hill and Camia Gamet, 38, shared an apartment in Jackson, Michigan, a town of 34,000 in the south central part of the state. She had been raised in foster homes and claimed to have been raped by a foster dad. People who knew Gamet were aware of her violent streak and abuse of drugs, a combination that made her unpredictable and dangerous.

     Marcel Hill, a high school graduate and fast food worker, was by contrast friendly and child-like. According to members of his family, he suffered "cognitive limitations" that made it difficult for him to handle simple everyday tasks like paying his bills. Unlike Gamet, he didn't have a violent bone in his body. This odd couple relationship would cost Mr. Hill his life.

     A year or so earlier, Camia Gamet, in a fit of rage, stabbed Marcel Hill with a knife, then stitched up his wound herself. Neither one of them reported the assault to the authorities. On another occasion, she sent Marcel to the hospital with a punctured lung. That assault did not lead to her arrest. But in March 2013, a Jackson County prosecutor charged Gamet with domestic violence and felonious assault after she pounded Marcel on the head with a hammer. Because he was afraid to press the matter, and refused to cooperate with law enforcement personnel, the prosecutor had no choice but to close the case.

     In the early morning hours of Saturday, May 18, 2013, a neighbor called 911 to report domestic violence at the odd couple's dwelling. Responding police officers found a blood-covered Gamet staggering around and slurring her words outside the apartment. Inside, officers found smashed furniture, a broken floor lamp, a bloody filet knife, and a damaged frying pan covered in blood.

     Amid all of the destruction and gore, officers discovered Marcel Hill. He had been repeatedly bludgeoned with hard objects--presumably the broken lamp and the frying pan--stabbed eleven times, and cut wide open in the torso with the knife.

     Police officers arrested Gamet that night. On Wednesday, May 20, 2013, a Jackson County prosecutor charged Camia Camet with open criminal homicide. (This meant a jury or a judge could determine the appropriate degree of murder in the event of a conviction.)

     The Gamet murder trial got underway in late February 2014. In her opening statement to the jury, Chief Assistant Prosecutor Kati Rezmierski portrayed the defendant as a violent person and a proven liar. According to the prosecutor, Gamet had deliberately and knowingly beaten, stabbed and slashed the victim to death.

     Defense attorney Anthony Raduazo told the jury that his client woke up from a drug-induced stupor that night to the sound of shattering glass. Believing that she was being attacked by an intruder, Gamet grabbed the lamp and the knife and used these objects to defend herself. Attorney Raduazo said the defendant had acted out of a "fear-driven rage," noting that in the encounter she had herself received cuts and bruises.

     After six days of prosecution testimony, the defense attorney put Gamet on the stand to testify on her own behalf. In telling her story of self-defense, Gamet did not come off as a very credible or sympathetic witness.

     In his closing remarks to the jury, attorney Raduazo said, "She is a woman and she is asleep and she is full of drugs and she is full of liquor. Did she react in a thoughtful manner? Or did she jump up and try to defend herself?" Raduazo pointed out that Gamet had not tried to dispose of Hill's body or clean up the death scene. "If this was preplanned and premeditated," he said, "it was a heck of a bad plan."

     Prosecutor Rezmierski, when it came her turn to address the jurors for the last time, said, "The victim did not die quickly. He knew his death was coming. The victim tried to protect himself and flee, but he was no match for the defendant. He never was a match." As to Gamet's supposed injuries, the prosecutor said, "She has barely a scratch, and he's eviscerated."

     On March 5, 2014, following a short period of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of first-degree murder.

     At Camia Gamet's sentencing hearing on April 16, 2014, County Circuit Court Judge John McBain saw the convicted murderer roll her eyes and snicker during a court presentation by one of Marcel Hill's aunts. The sight infuriated the judge who, in speaking directly to Gamet said, "You gutted him like a fish in the apartment! You were relentless! You stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed until he was dead! I agree with the family, I hope you die in prison! You know, if this was a death penalty state, you'd be getting the chair!"

     Judge McBain sentenced Camia Gamet to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Afterward, defense attorney Raduazo told reporters he would appeal his client's verdict and the sentence. That appeal is pending. 

18 comments:

  1. not a violent bone in his body? marcel was convicted of sexual assault with in tent to penetrate, marcel has multiple convictions of domestic violence, several witness came forward to testify that marcel had assaulted camia in a local bar just hours before his death. one witness came forward to testify that marcel put a knife to her throat and demanded sex from her, another was to testify that camia had come to her residence in the middle of the night scantily clothe and bleeding from injuries marcel had inflicted, another witness came to testify that marcel had alledged that he had assaulted him and the police refused to take action because in their words he is a piece of shit who beat every woman hes been with, the program snapped featuring this story aired 3-22-15 and it documents how a controversial ruling that a bias judge agreed with turned all these witnesses away and anything of marcel abuse towards camia was not admisable, the show also documents as the journalist from the Jackson citizen patriot noted that marcel was not the innocent person he was portrayed to be during the trail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly what i thought from her actions in vourt and her face reactions tells me there was something more then just cold blooded she had hate towers him.and probably towards the family because mostlikely they knew of.hes abuse towards her i most definitely do.not. justify what she did but i understand her stupid and NOT SMART reactions. Because of what she was dealing with and had no way to prove her self since she was looked as a murder i just hope.she repen for what she did and finds GOD TO BE WITH HER

      Delete
    2. Jesus Christ you retard, have you ever heard of a period or capitalization?

      Delete
    3. Hahaha! Back to school!

      Delete
  2. I agree with the previous comment. I'm not necessarily saying it was justified, but the outcome is not right either. It's not so clean cut as it was portrayed and he wasn't the angelic childlike man that was painted.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I feel John B. Bains should not take sides.The judge should be professional and neutral regardless of crime that may or may not happened. Also based on the homicide that occurred. There was domestic violence commited by marcel Hill. Should not the judge and jury consider this possible evidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Judges SHOULD be impartial and controlled. I agree with this completely. But watching some video tapes of the trial, she was clearly not very respectful of the court and she wasn't taking the proceedings very seriously. She looked to me as if she thought everything was a joke, and she expected to walk out of the courtroom to her former life(minus her boyfriend).

      Delete
  4. I feel bad for this woman she clearly did NOT get a fair trial instead she was screwed by the system that failed her since she was a toddler! Sad!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She took the life of a human being. Then, thought it was funny while in court. Did not get a fair trial? Sounds like she did. Sounds that both of these people were violent and evil. Lots of people have bad childhoods, but they do not grow up to be like this woman. She killed a man and didn't seem to have any remorse for her actions.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you sherry lots of people have bad childhood's that's no excuse to take a man's life even if he's abusive you always have a choice and she chose to take his life and she deserves to spend her life in jail however the judge should have been more professional and not have gotten emotionally involved in this case because now that will give the defendant a reason to ask for a new trial I do hope she gets the same verdict tho..

      Delete
  5. I agree

    Marcel was found responsible for Sexual Assult, Domestic Violence and Attempted Murder so he was ready to slit Camias throat

    Camia was also guilty for Domestic Violence, Drug Abuse and Murder

    ReplyDelete
  6. They both wrong, he was a loser and he should have been instulized for mental illness then he would have never met this care taker on drugs.

    ReplyDelete
  7. She didn't stab him in fear of her life and run away. She slit him from head to sternum. The judge "took sides" because she was laughing and rolling her eyes during sentencing? Count me (and any rational person) on his side then.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes I believe there may have been abuse on on both ends..but I do believe she was the agresser...she was full of anger and rage from childhood and she took it out on someone who was vulnerable as she once was..I fell sorry for his family.may God bless them and I hope camia seeks forgiveness in God for her act of murder...and as far as her sentence I agree with the judge, she showed no remorse, norvrespect for the family, or the court room..rolling eys, snickering and shrugging her face in court..her body language ,attitude, and demeanour and all was nasty rude and disrespectful..Her character alone in the court room got her exactly what she deserves.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Is she still alive and how is she holding up in jail? Is she ok is she fitting in with the other inmates?

    ReplyDelete
  10. The judge was a disgrace. He is supposed to remain impartial and apply the law in a calm and collected manner. He didn't even try to hide his hatred and bias. What this defendant did, or didn't do is irrelevant, but far too many people are blinded by their own lynch-mob revenge mentality to see the bigger picture - that nobody in a court presided over by this judge is guaranteed a fair trial. Land of the free ? My ass.

    ReplyDelete