Roger Hale said he plans to appeal the jury decision that convicted him of burning down his own home.

"It just floored me," Hale said of the jury's decision that he was guilty of the class A felony.

"I really thought it'd be over," Hale said of his ordeal. "I never expected to lose."

Hale said he has spent the week since his conviction trying to gather information for an appeal. Hale hopes to remain free on bond while his appeal is in progress.

Hale said he passed a lie detector test before the trial that showed he did not set the fire that burned down his house on Sept. 24, 1996. Hale said he would willingly take another polygraph test to try to prove his innocence, but the results are not admissible in a court of law.

His father Basel Hale said the family is trying to learn from mistakes in the first trial.

Hale said several witnesses were not called to testify and several pieces of evidence were not admitted.

Hale said he found information from firefighter's teaching guides that show the burn patterns in the home were not necessarily caused by arson. The prosecution in the case used expert witnesses to testify that burns in the house were probably caused by arson using an accelerant. But, Hale said his information tries to tell firefighters that suspicious looking burns could be caused naturally by an accidental fire.

Hale, a lifetime resident of the Pierceton-Larwill area, said he was "devastated, crying," when he pulled up to his burning house the morning of Sept. 24, 1996. Hale was separated from his wife at the time and has two children, a son now 6 and a daughter now 4, who live with their mother.

Hale said he hasn't told his children anything about the trial because "I don't think they know anything. They are not at the age they understand."

When asked if he had any idea what may have caused the fire, Hale said, "Not really ... Guesses is all it would be." But, Hale insists that he did not set the fire.

Hale said the only thing salvaged from the fire scene was a load of clothes in a clothes dryer.

Hale said prosecutors offered him a plea agreement before the trial and offered to drop the arson charge to a class C felony. Hale would have faced 2-4 years in prison with a possible suspended sentence under the plea agreement. The conviction on the class A felony means Hale faces 20-50 years in prison.

"I declined" the agreement, Hale said. "I didn't want that. I thought it was a joke ... ridiculous."

"I don't know what they decided it on," Hale said of the jury decision. "In my mind it (his innocence) is crystal clear."

"He didn't do it," his father said.

"I haven't quit; I haven't stopped," Hale said of his case.

Hale said everyone in his family has been pulling together to help him. "I think Roger is innocent without any doubt in my mind," Basel, his father, said.

The judge still has the right to overturn Hale's conviction before the appeal. Hale said that if nothing else, he would like another trial.

Hale's attorney Richard Thonert confirmed that Hale is planning to appeal.

Thonert said Hale will file a document called a precipe, or a motion to correct errors, after Hale's next court hearing. That document must be filed with the court as the first step to beginning an appeal, Thonert said. The appeal process is quite lengthy, Thonert said and involves many steps.

Thonert said he was surprised by the guilty verdict against Hale. "We expected they'd return a verdict of not guilty," Thonert said. "We believe the evidence did not establish that an arson took place much less that Roger Hale was the person who caused it." [[In-content Ad]]