About a dozen people were in Marshall Superior Court I Wednesday afternoon to see if Judge Robert Bowen would accept a plea agreement of 54 year old Vincent Carnegie and announce his sentencing.
Before the court session got underway, Carnegie’s attorney, Tom Black approached the bench with Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Tami Napier. After a short discussion Judge Bowen said that today (Wednesday, Nov. 1st) was the date set for the submission of a plea agreement for the two cases before the court.
Attorney Black indicated that Mr. Carnegie was not in a position to admit to the allegation of burglary.
Judge Bowen asked Carnegie if he was withdrawing the plea agreement as written as it since it ties both the theft and burglary case together in the agreement. Carnegie indicated that he was not willing to admit to the burglary charge.
Judge Bowen said, “We are not going to proceed any further today. I will set it for a status conference next Wednesday at 9 a.m. I will meet with your attorney and the prosecutor to discuss on how we will proceed from this point forward.”
Carnegie has been held in the Marshall County Jail for almost 6 month after an incident in May where he is accused of entering a home on Plymouth’s south side, handcuffing a woman and driving her around. After she escaped from him a police deputy picked her up. That incident lead to a police standoff on King Road north of 9th Road where it is alleged that Carnegie pulled a gun and pointed it at himself and threatened to kill himself as well as pointing the gun at police officers. During the standoff a struggle ensued and Carnegie shot himself in the chest.
The second case stems from the 2015 allegation that Carnegie drove off the lot of an RV manufacturing site in Nappanee in a 2016 Newmar RV worth $500,000. The RV was seen in downtown Plymouth by several Newmar employees who called and reported the stolen vehicle.
Prosecuting Attorney Nelson Chipman said, “We were not totally surprised by Mr. Carnegie’s withdrawal of his anticipated plea of guilty pursuant to an agreement. Mr. Black warned us that his client was having second thoughts of proceeding. It comes with the territory. We will prepare for trial.”
Listeners and readers are reminded that charging information supported by an affidavit of probable cause is merely an allegation that a crime has been committed and that there is only probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. They are presumed innocent throughout the proceedings and are entitled to be represented by counsel and entitled to a trial by jury at which the State is obligated to provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt before a judgment of guilt may be made.
