Ark. Court Reverses Woman’s Arson for Insurance Conviction

June 21, 2007

Separate emails using a comma.

The Arkansas Court of Appeals dismissed a Hot Spring County woman’s arson conviction, ruling that prosecutors did not offer proof other than a disputed confession that she set fire to her home.

Barbara Fowler was sentenced to 10 years in prison after a Hot Spring County Circuit Court found her guilty of felony arson. During her trial, prosecutors presented a confession she gave to police, but Fowler recanted the statement, and several witnesses testified that she had stated her intentions to burn down her property.

In the disputed confession, Fowler told police how she carried out the fire, complete with a diagram of the room where she set the fire.

Prosecutors also presented evidence showing that Fowler was in bankruptcy and that her pending divorce would substantially reduce her annual income. According to the ruling, prosecutors presented evidence that Fowler had discussed burning down the house for insurance money and that she moved many of her personal possessions to a storage facility before the fire.

The court ruled that prosecutors may have offered evidence showing suspicious activity but failed to prove that Fowler set the fire.

“Although we are satisfied that the State presented ample evidence to support a conclusion that Fowler intended to burn her house down, without Fowler’s supporting confession, the State failed to carry its burden of proving that Fowler actually carried out the act,” Judge Larry D. Vaught wrote in the ruling.

Separate emails using a comma.
Subscribe Insurance news headlines delivered to your email.
Get a free subscription to our popular email newsletter.

Latest Comments

  • June 22, 2007 at 3:20 am
    Big Fish says:
    All it takes is a conversation with an attorney to inform you of your right to rip off an insurance company to get away with arson. You have to have a priest, a rabbi and a pr... read more
  • June 22, 2007 at 1:47 am
    Craig says:
    I guess your eyebrows have to be smoking to be found guilty.
  • June 22, 2007 at 7:56 am
    jody says:
    The said that INTENT was there, but NO CONFESSION. How did the Police obtain her confession? Then what becomes of CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE? I've read that people have receiv... read more
See all comments

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features