In 1982, Subramanyam Vedam, better known as Subu, was arrested for the alleged murder of his former roommate Tom Kinser, who had been murdered years prior.

Kinser’s remains were found in a wooded area of Rothrock State Forest, nine months after his disappearance in December 1980. Officials charged Vedam for Kinser’s death after finding out he took a trip with Kinser to Lewistown around the same time of Kinser’s disappearance.

“The state’s case against him was pretty weak in the sense that there were no witnesses and nobody could really come up with a motive,” said Penn State professor Russell Frank, who has been documenting the case and interviewing Vedam for the past decade. “The last I heard, Subu said he bought the gun after Kinzer disappeared, not before, but they found someone to testify to having sold Subu the gun.”

The selling and possession of the gun seemed to be a strong position for the prosecution despite the fact Vedam had a .25 caliber gun, whereas the bullet wound found in Kinser’s skull was smaller than a .25 caliber bullet, which Frank deemed “impossible.”

Forty years later, in the summer 2022, Gopal Balachandran, a member of the Borough Council in State College, became interested in the case and began digging through old files pertaining to Vedam and his trial. Balachandran found evidence that should have come to light during the trial but was suppressed by the prosecution.

At the time, the information on the size of the bullet wound was not shared with Vedam’s defense, and therefore, it could not be disputed. As a result, the evidence was not brought forth, and Vedam was sentenced to life without parole for Kinser’s death.

On the basis of the discrepancy between the size of the bullet hole in Kinser’s skull and Vedam’s bullet sizes, Balachandran and his team filed the paperwork needed to request a hearing for the new evidence.

“The hearing took place in July, and the judge scheduled a follow-up hearing that’s taking place [February 6] and Friday, (February 7),” Balachandran said. “Paul and his team have found a ballistics expert who’s willing to testify on their behalf having to do with the discrepancy between the size of the bullet hold and the size of the bullet. They’re saying on the basis of that, if the judge agrees that it was impossible for that gun to have been used, they’re hoping that the judge will at that point grant Subu a new trial.”

A new trial is still up in the air, though. While the judge does have the opportunity to grant Vedam a new trial, Frank shared how he thinks a new trial would stand up in court.

“I mean, how good are people’s memories going to be about something that happened so many years ago?” he said.

Although Vedam was known to be a “wild child,” Frank said none of the people who knew Vedam could have imagined he would ever commit murder.

“Nobody is claiming that Subu was a choirboy when he was in high school,” he said. “I mean, he was kind of a wild kid, doing drugs and hanging out with people who were doing drugs. I’ve spoken to a lot of people who remember him from high school, and nobody could picture that he would commit a murder.”

Even though Vedam was found guilty, it seemed to be due to a mixture of three factors: the jury, the defense, and omission of evidence.

“It was an all-white jury and Subu was of dark complexion, but there’s no way to get into the heads of the jury, so it wouldn’t be fair to say they were a racist jury, but a lot of people have doubts,” Frank said. “One thing that’s always a crazy part of this is that it came up during trial that he did yoga and meditated. At those times, those were things that were brought up to show what a weirdo he was and how alien he was to the people of central Pennsylvania at that time.”

The othering of Vedam worked as the story was almost buried at the time as it was only covered by the Daily Collegian and Centre Daily Times, whereas in Frank’s opinion, it would have attracted a fair amount of media attention now.

“I mean, the whole thing would have just been a huge story if it happened now, so that’s a little odd to me, the way it was covered,” said Frank.

Now, Vedam’s family has been working to spread the word on what they deem to be an unfair trial involving “entirely circumstantial evidence” in hopes of bringing attention to his inadequate trial and eventually bringing Vedam home.

“Instead of being a truth-finding process, sometimes it can just be about wanting to win the case, which is unfortunate because people’s lives are hanging in the balance,” Frank explained.

Over the last 40 years, Vedam has shown himself to be what Frank deemed as a “model prisoner,” as he’s taken courses to educate himself within prison, tutored those around him, and has not shown himself to be a violent person throughout his entire time in prison.

“He was 19 years old,” Frank said. “Should somebody go to prison for the rest of their lives for something that they did, even if you grant it was a heinous act and it cannot be excused? Shouldn’t all punishments come to an end at some point and shouldn’t you be able to evaluate somebody on the basis of their conduct while in prison to determine are they a risk?”

While a lot has changed in the 40 years since Vedam was sentenced to life without parole, the now 62-year-old must wait to hear if the judge will grant him a retrial based on the evidence brought forth in court on February 6.