It’s been five long years, but the name David Camm and the story of his Georgetown family’s tragic murder will likely resonate within this community for many more to come.

The mention of his name can heighten emotions, bring back heated opinions, and in the end, still leaves people with unanswered questions.

Richard Schlesinger, a news correspondent with CBS’ “48 Hours Mystery,” has followed the case from the beginning, and his reports have been shown in two previously aired episodes. The first came immediately after the first trial and the second after the appellate court’s decision to grant Camm a retrial.

The third, which airs Saturday night, will likely be the end to the five-year long saga as far as CBS is concerned, Schlesinger said.

“There’s stuff in here you’ve never seen before,” he said via phone from New York. “It’s an old case, but a new show. Keith Henderson (Floyd County’s Prosecutor) and his folks were very open to us. You’ll see how they planned for this case, which is something we rarely do because they rarely let us in. You’ll see a lot of the behind-the-scenes stuff that you hardly ever get to see.”

Saturday night’s episode will also include the first-ever TV interview with David Camm on the case where, Schlesinger said, “he still forcefully maintains his innocence.”

“He was very well versed in the evidence, and he had some interesting things to say,” he said.

It took producers a significant amount of time to convince Camm to agree to the interview because “he wasn’t pleased” with the first show, Schlesinger said.

The 52-year-old reporter said when he heard about the murders and the former Indiana State Trooper’s arrest, he was intrigued and took the idea to his CBS producers. He began following the case soon after.

“I was immediately interested in the case because of the question of who do you believe,” Schlesinger said. “Do you believe the blood spots or the eye witnesses” (who said they were playing basketball with Camm during the murder).

Schlesinger also thought Camm, at least at the time, an “unlikely suspect” and was anxious to see how the case played out.

Schlesinger said “48 Hours Mystery” looks for cases to feature on its show by searching through small, local newspapers and scanning through wire services in different states. But rarely do they jump on a case that already has a large amount of media attention.

“We tend to stay away from the cases that all the other shows are focusing on,” he said. “We live and die on access, so we must be able to get in there and talk to those involved — both the defense and prosecutors. If there are millions of people banging on their door, we probably won’t get great access.”

As for the cases they do follow, Schlesinger said it’s often times “the luck of the draw.”

“Some things we just don’t find out about,” he said. “And we don’t look at a case just because somebody did something wrong. There has to be some other issues involved — some lessons to be learned. It needs to be more than just a missing person or a dead person.”

He called the Camm case “an incredible exercise” in illuminating interesting aspects of the U.S. justice system, which is the main factor they consider when choosing cases.

“We learned a lot about forensic science and the value of expert option,” Schlesinger said. “We learned an incredible amount about how juries consider these cases.”

He went on to call the Camm trials “a great laboratory for demonstrating what the justice system is capable of.”

“Everything is unique about this case,” he continued. “I haven’t covered a case before where the appeals court has been quite so forceful in their opinion about the first trial. And this little episode where charges were dropped (against Camm) and refiled less than an hour later was unprecedented — I’ve never seen that before.

“There was a chunk of stuff that I’ve never seen before, and I suspect a lot of people have never seen before. I mean, it’s been five years and people are still talking about this, so there’s obviously just something about this case.”

As Schlesinger said he anxiously awaits the Indiana Supreme Court’s decision on a possible third trial — which is expected by early next year — he believes it unlikely, and Saturday’s episode is probably the end to his five-year journey with the Camm case.

“I learned a lot time ago not to predict, especially with this case. I’d be surprised at a third trial, but at this point nothing would shock me. As we all well know, this story keeps changing.”