KENNY RICHEY, a Scot on death row in the United States for killing a two-year-old girl during a fit of jealous rage, has become a cause célèbre among anti-death penalty advocates around the world.

Amnesty International describes his as “the most compelling case of innocence on death row”, citing questionable forensic evidence and a sham trial that was not even held before a jury.

Karen Torley, Richey’s Scottish fiancée, has launched an international campaign to have his conviction overturned and has secured the support of 150 British MPs.

However, investigators from Ohio who gathered evidence that convicted Richey some 17 years ago are adamant of his guilt. But last week, the federal appeals court for the US Sixth Circuit sent the case back for reconsideration by state judges in Ohio. Ken Parsigian, Richey’s lawyer, believes that the decision brings his client a step closer to getting off death row.

Nevertheless, Mr Parsigian, who has campaigned for Richey’s release for the past 13 years, is not absolutely convinced of his innocence.

“I am not 110 per cent convinced he is innocent,” he said. “But I am 100 per cent convinced that there is no way he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It is more likely than not he didn’t do it, but I am not going to say I am that convinced.”

At 4am on June 30 1986, Steve Stechshulte, then a volunteer fireman and a sheriff’s deputy, battled falling masonry and a fierce blaze in a bid to save two-year-old Cynthia Collins.

She had been left home alone by her drunk, drug- using mother while Richey had allegedly agreed to baby-sit. She was found dead, curled up on the floor at the end of her bed after breathing noxious fumes.

Hope Collins, Cynthia’s mother, who refuses to talk about the case, was found guilty of child negligence and sentenced to 45 days in jail and three years probation.

Richey, who left Scotland aged 18 to live with his American father, had been drinking since noon the day before the fire with friends near his flat in Columbus Grove, Ohio.

His girlfriend, Kandy Barchet, had left him for a new lover named Mike Nichols with whom she shared a bed in the flat beneath the Collins’s when the fire broke out.

Prosecutors argued that Richey set the fire to kill them while they slept. Mr Nichols has since told an American television show that Richey threatened to kill him that night.

Mr Stechshulte said he interviewed some 60 people within 48 hours of the murder who proved Richey had motive, means and opportunity to set the blaze that killed the two-year-old.

“There is no doubt in my mind that it was arson,” he said. “The fire burned so fierce and so quick. Also, on the concrete floor beneath the carpet there were clear and present marks, a very hot spot in the middle of the floor and a pour trail that led out onto the balcony.”

Mr Stechshulte believes Richey let himself into the flat, poured a puddle of petrol on the living room floor, made a trail of paint thinner out to the balcony and lit it.

“He admitted to me to going in to check on the child,” he said. “He knows he had access to that apartment.”

Before the fire started Richey broke into a greenhouse across the street where petrol and paint thinner was stored. He stole two buckets of flowers that he later placed in front of Ms Barchet’s door in the apartment building.

No cans of fuel or accelerant were reported missing from the greenhouse while no empty cans were ever found, but the flower buckets were never tested for flammable materials, according to arson reports obtained by The Times.

Richey was found by Mr Stechshulte, trying to get into the flat as it burned. “The first person we had there was Kenny Richey trying to get into that apartment to save the baby. The man is dressed in full battle dress uniform with dress combat boots.”

Mr Stechshulte asked Richey how he had known the building was on fire. “He told me he saw it from his bedroom window. But that is impossible,” he said.

Also one witness said she saw Richey asleep in a bush 20 minutes before the blaze.

Mr Parsigian’s defence of Richey is simple. He says the evidence of arson is based on flawed forensics. Witness statements, meanwhile, are unreliable since many have changed. “The most important thing is the scientific evidence is phoney. Their science expert based his testimony on stuff that isn’t science,” Mr Parsigian said. He believes Richey was denied a fair trial because his lawyer opted for a hearing before a three-judge panel instead of a jury.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• UK regional accents thrive against the odds
• ‘Scarecrow’ wind farms put rare birds to flight
• What an anti-climax: G-spot is a myth