ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Friday, February 9, 1996 TAG: 9602090056
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-5 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: CHINCOTEAGUE
SOURCE: Associated Press
The widow of an Eastern Shore man whose death in a fire three years ago was ruled accidental has received a new evaluation from Maryland's chief medical examiner that the case was a homicide.
``His death certificate has been changed to homicide, too,'' said Pauline Mathews, whose husband Stanley, 63, died in a Baltimore hospital two days after the fire.
Law enforcement authorities haven't reopened an investigation.
Accomack County Commonwealth's Attorney Gary Agar and Chincoteague Police Chief Willis Dize said the matter was referred to state police. State police spokeswoman Tammy Van Dame said Thursday that state investigators would meet with Agar to discuss the case.
Mathews has been pressing her claim that her husband was murdered since the December 1992 fire. Last year, she hired Rene Armbruster, a private investigator in Virginia Beach.
Armbruster said she was skeptical at first but became appalled at how the investigation was conducted. She said evidence found at the scene was mishandled and some of it disappeared.
In six months, she interviewed 15 experts and witnesses, compiling a 5-inch-thick report that Mathews sent to the Maryland medical examiner in late November.
The revised homicide ruling listed 14 reasons for the change, including a pattern of gasoline pooling on the floor where Stanley Mathews was burned. At least a quart of gasoline would be needed to produce the pattern, arson experts said, but no gasoline container was found at the scene.
Also, the report found that money, firearms, a flashlight and a wallet belonging to Mathews were missing from his house.
``Stan deserves the truth to come out,'' Mathews said. ``And he deserves for the authorities to investigate it, because he was a human being.''
Agar said the medical examiner's reclassification ``in and of itself does not constitute new evidence.''
Dize said authorities can't prosecute someone solely on a suspicion.
``When you go into court, you're talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt,'' he said. ``As far as I know, this isn't the case here.''
LENGTH: Short : 48 linesby CNB