Cameron Todd Willingham, convicted of the Dec. 23, 1991 capital...

Cameron Todd Willingham, convicted of the Dec. 23, 1991 capital murder of his three children in a fire, waits for guards to take him back to his cell on death row in Livingston, TX, days before his execution on Feb. 17, 2004. "Frontline" investigates in the Oct. 19 show. Credit: Scott Honea

On Dec. 23, 1991, in Corsicana, Texas, about 50 miles south of Dallas, a devastating house fire killed three young children - 1-year-old twins, Karmon and Kameron, and 2-year-old Amber. The father, Cameron Todd Willingham, was home at the time. No one initially suspected him of arson until a pattern began to emerge: He went out partying that night, did not have any fire-related injuries that day, lied to investigators about his efforts to save the kids and had been known to violently beat his wife, Stacy. Finally, there were signs of an accelerant, which may have spread the fire.

Willingham eventually was convicted, and was executed at Huntsville in 2004. But did he really kill his kids? Many say no, while forensics and fire experts now claim the fire likely was accidental.

MY SAY: Last year, The New Yorker "reopened" the Willingham case with an exhaustive investigation of the circumstances of his conviction, and the details pointed to a wrongful conviction. "Frontline" seems to be going down the same path - except this path is slightly more circuitous and the destination uncertain.

Did Willingham - whom "Frontline" paints as an unsavory character but not necessarily a child murderer - kill his kids? Unclear, but as The New Yorker showed, the arson evidence presented at trial was almost certainly flawed.

As usual, "Frontline" presents a carefully reported story, but there is one particularly strange omission: Willingham's wife, Stacy. She signed an affidavit, just before his execution, stating that he had confessed to her that he had set the fire. But she is not interviewed on camera and there is no explanation why. Moreover, the broadcast never bothers asking whether there was another way the fire could have been set intentionally.

BOTTOM LINE: Watching this, you may suspect "Frontline" hoped to settle the question of Willingham's guilt or innocence once and for all. It does not. But it does keep alive the question of reasonable doubt.

GRADE: B

SUBSCRIBE

Unlimited Digital AccessOnly 25¢for 6 months

ACT NOWSALE ENDS SOON | CANCEL ANYTIME