THE MULLINS-JOHNSON CASE: THE MURDER THAT WASN`T

Transcription

THE MULLINS-JOHNSON CASE: THE MURDER THAT WASN’T
BY DAVID BAYLISS
ACTING EDITOR: Win Wahrer
On September 21, 2005, a 35-year-old Ojibway first
nation man stepped doubtfully from the University Avenue Superior Court House in Toronto, Ontario, into a forest of microphones. William Mullins-Johnson, known as
Bill to his friends and family, looked up to the brilliant
blue sky and cried. It had been twelve years, two months
and 25 days since he had last seen the sky as a free man.
In June, 1993, four-year-old Valin Johnson lived in Sault
Ste. Marie with her parents, Kim and Paul, and her siblings John and Jean, three and six-yearsold respectively.
Bill Mullins-Johnson, Paul’s brother, had been staying at
the family home for several months, frequently babysitting the children when the parents were out. By all
accounts, including those of Kim, Paul and the family
doctor, all three children were healthy, active kids; and
they loved their uncle Bill.
On that fateful morning, June 27, 1993, at about 7 AM,
Paul found Valin’s lifeless body in her bed; Bill was asleep
on the couch downstairs in the living room. Within hours,
local doctors had concluded that Valin had been sodomized and murdered. There was a complete absence of
direct evidence or forensic trace evidence – no hair, no
FOUNDING EDITOR: Harold Levy
PAST EDITOR: Vicki Preston
LAYOUT: Tamara Knezic
WHAT’S INSIDE
Photography Credit Toronto Star
semen, no saliva, and no biological material of any sort –
connecting Bill to Valin’s body or to the bed where she
was found. Valin was found in a sleeping position, clad in
her underwear and a fully zipped up one-piece pajama
suit. On the basis of medical hypotheses that, firstly,
Valin’s death was a homicide, secondly, that she was
killed in the course of a sexual assault and, thirdly, that
Bill had exclusive access to her at the time she was postuContinued on page 2
FLASH: MEL GREEN TO BENCH STORY ON PAGE 31
KYLE UNGER: GRANTED BAIL
Kyle applied for judicial interim release on
October 19, 2005 in
front of Justice Holly
Beard who, on November 4th, in a written
decision granted Mr.
Unger bail saying there
are serious concerns he
may have been wrongfully convicted and
strong evidence that
Mr. Unger’s conviction may not be sustainable. She further said, “the evidence that remains against him is fraught with serious
weaknesses.”
CREDITS
On September 13, 2004, AIDWYC submitted a s.696.1
application on Mr. Unger’s behalf to Federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler.
Mr. Unger was convicted in February 1992 of the June 23,
1990 rape and murder of 16-year-old Brigitte Grenier in a
small town in Manitoba. Mr. Unger’s co-accused, Timothy Houlahan, was also convicted. In July 1993, the Court
of Appeal dismissed Mr. Unger’s appeal but allowed Mr.
Houlahan’s appeal. Mr. Houlahan committed suicide
prior to his re-trial. Mr. Unger’s application for leave to
the Supreme Court of Canada was dismissed.
On April 23, 2003, after the DNA results had been
obtained in James Driskell’s case, the Government of
Manitoba, through Deputy Attorney General Bruce MacFarlane, set up the Forensic Review Committee mandate
to ascertain whether there were other cases like that of Mr.
Driskell in which post-conviction DNA typing might cast
PG. 1
The Mullins-Johnson Case
PG. 1
Kyle Unger: Granted Bail
PG. 5
President’s Report
PG. 6-10
Taking it to the Rock
PG. 11-13
Steven’s Long Journey
for Justice
PG. 14-15
Books Reviewed
PG. 17-21
Critical Cases
PG. 23-24
Compensation File
PG. 24-26
Canadian Updates
PG. 27
International Updates
PG. 28-35
AIDWYC on the Move
PG. 36
Congratulations
PG. 37
Thank You
PG. 38-39
William Mullins Johnson
First Few Months of Freedom
PG. 41
Can You Help AIDWYC?
PG. 42
Can AIDWYC Help You?
Continued on page 3
ASSOCIATION IN DEFENCE OF THE WRONGLY CONVICTED — PAGE 1
THE MULLINS-JOHNSON CASE
Continued from page 1
lated to have died, he was charged with firstdegree murder.
trauma to the anus; Bill is 6 feet 5 inches tall and
weighed 250 pounds at the time of Valin’s death.
William Mullins-Johnson was convicted of firstdegree murder on September 21, 1994, after a
two-week trial. In accordance with Canadian
jurisprudence, the jury was not told of Bill’s
immediate, persistent and emphatic protestations
of innocence. Bill began his new life as a federal
inmate serving a sentence of life imprisonment
with no parole for twenty-five years. On his first
night in Millhaven Penitentiary, inmates pounded
on the walls of his cell warning the “diddler” of
his impending doom. Thus began twelve years of
hell – twelve years of vilification, even by convicts, as a child sex murderer, twelve years as a
potential target for any hero keen to earn his jail
house stripes by taking out a child killer, twelve
years of constant danger, twelve years of the hardest kind of time – the time of an innocent man
caged and reviled.
Based on his belief that the body had bruises and
small hemorrhages caused at the time of death,
the pathologist further concluded that Valin had
been strangled or otherwise deliberately suffocated. He estimated that Valin died between 8 and
10 o’clock the previous evening, for most of
which time Bill had been the only adult in the
house with Valin and her brother John.
On December 19, 1996, Bill’s appeal to the
Ontario Court of Appeal was dismissed with a
prescient dissent by Mr. Justice Stephen Borins.
The appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was
dismissed in a three-line judgment on May 28th,
1998. On September 15, 2005, AIDWYC filed its
brief with Federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler,
requesting a review of Bill’s case pursuant to section 696.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
Finally, on September 21, 2005, in what seemed
like a miracle to Bill, he was granted bail pending
the decision of the minister.
GROUNDS FOR THE MINISTERIAL
REVIEW APPLICATION
The prosecution of William Mullins-Johnson
relied almost entirely on the evidence of medical
doctors.
A local hospital pathologist conducted the
autopsy and called in a local pediatrician to
observe. The pediatrician, inexperienced in matters of pathology, concluded, based on her experience dealing with live children, that the size of
Valin’s rectal opening was consistent with chronic
sodomy for several months prior to her death.
There was no tearing, bleeding or other visible
The crown obtained a consultation report from Dr.
Charles Smith, considered at the time to be
Ontario’s leading expert on child deaths. Like the
pathologist who made the initial diagnosis of
homicide, Dr. Smith was not trained as a forensic
pathologist. Based on his examination of tissue
slides taken at the time of the autopsy, Dr. Smith
concluded that Valin had probably been sexually
assaulted at the time of her death. It was this critical evidence – that Valin was murdered in the
course of a sexual assault – which legally entitled
the jury to convict of first-degree murder.
In all, four pathologists testified at the trial; two
were called by the crown and two by the defence.
Dr. Smith stood alone in his assertion of sexual
assault at the time of death. The original examining pathologist stood alone in his estimation of a
time of death which gave Bill “exclusive opportunity” to have harmed Valin. Three of the pathologists concurred that there had been chronic sexual
abuse in the months prior to Valin’s death. The
case went to the jury essentially on the issue of
identity, with even Bill’s defence counsel conceding that Valin was a victim of chronic sexual
abuse.
Bill asked for the help of AIDWYC, the real court
of last resort for so many. The involvement of Dr.
Charles Smith in the case immediately tweaked
the “wrongful conviction antennae” of AIDWYC
lawyers. In 2001, AIDWYC sent a letter to the
Chief Coroner of Ontario, Dr. James Young,
responsible for supervising all forensic autopsies
in Ontario, asking that the Mullins-Johnson case
be reviewed. This letter was never responded to.
PAGE 2 — ASSOCIATION IN DEFENCE OF THE WRONGLY CONVICTED
As AIDWYC’s research into Bill’s case progressed, it became apparent that the medical opinions underpinning Bill’s conviction were
questionable. AIDWYC retained the services of
Dr. Bernard Knight of Wales. Dr. Knight, one of
the world’s leading forensic pathologists and
author of the only English language text on ascertaining time of death, reported to AIDWYC that
there was no scientific validity to the procedure
used by the original pathologist to determine the
time of death. There was no exclusive opportunity
for William Mullins-Johnson to have committed
the “crime”.
But, had there been a crime at all? To answer this
question, Dr. Knight needed to examine microscopic slides of tissue taken from Valin’s body at
the autopsy. For the next two years AIDWYC
lawyers requested production of the slides. Each
time they asked the response was the same: the
slides (and the blocks of tissue from which the
slides had been cut) had been misplaced by Dr.
Smith and could not be located. Finally, in
December 2004, with the help of news reporter
Harold Levy, who threatened to document the
“loss” of the materials in the Toronto Star, the
slides were found within the Office of the Chief
Coroner for Ontario (OCCO).
Once located, AIDWYC continued to press for
the release of the slides for examination by Dr.
Knight. Abruptly, on February 16, 2005,
AIDWYC received a report authored by Dr.
Michael S. Pollanen, Medical Director of the Toronto Forensic Pathology Unit of OCCO. Under
the leadership of its new chief coroner, Dr. Barry
Mclennan, OCCO had taken it upon itself to
review the Mullins-Johnson forensic file and
related court testimony. The conclusions of the
Pollanen report were momentous:
•
There is no known scientific method for concluding that Valin Johnson died between 8
and 10 PM; in fact, there was no scientific
method available for estimating the time of
death any more precisely than some time
within a five hour time span.
THE MULLINS-JOHNSON CASE
•
There is no positive medical evidence that
Valin Johnson was murdered and the cause
of her death is unascertained;
•
There is no positive medical evidence that
Valin Johnson was sexually assaulted at any
time.
The details of the OCCO report were as shocking
as its conclusions. It found that the findings of the
original doctors were based on a misinterpretation of normal post mortem changes. An enlarged
rectal opening, Dr. Pollanen pointed out, was not
proof of sexual assault; it was, rather, a typical
finding consistent with loss of muscle tension at
death. What had been described as “bruises” on
Valin’s body were almost entirely indications of
post mortem lividity – the gravitational pooling
of blood that occurs in all dead bodies. Most
astoundingly, what Dr. Charles Smith had concluded was microscopic evidence of bleeding into
the anal sheath was an artifact – not pre-death
bleeding – but, rather, seepage of blood after
death, which had been caused by the process
employed in preparing the microscopic tissue
slides during the autopsy.
In March of 2005, the remainder of the biological
samples from Valin’s autopsy were reportedly
located in an envelope on the desk of Dr. Smith in
his OCCO office. A supplementary report by Dr.
Pollanen, incorporating examination of the newly
located materials, confirmed and strengthened the
findings of his earlier report. Tissue slides were
sent to Wales. Dr. Knight, in a detailed report of
his own, agreed entirely with the conclusions of
Dr. Pollanen.
William Mullins-Johnson, it seems, was not a
murderer at all; rather, he was a victim of pseudoscience.
THE FUTURE FOR BILL MULLINSJOHNSON
Thanks to the efforts of AIDWYC, Bill awaits the
Minister’s decision as a free man. But the memory of a reclusive jailhouse existence is fresh and
the future ever uncertain. As in all wrongful conviction cases, reputations are at stake and old
opinions will die hard, if at all. This is especially
true in a “non-DNA case” where absolute proof
of innocence is unavailable no matter how inno-
Continued from page 1
light on the validity of a conviction. The Committee was directed to:
•
“...examine all cases of culpable homicide:
•
prosecuted in Manitoba during the past 15
years;
•
in which the Crown tendered and relied upon
microscopic hair comparison evidence;
•
where the accused pleaded not guilty at trial,
asserting factual innocence, but was found
guilty; and
•
[where the accused] appealed the conviction
to the Court of Appeal, still asserting factual
innocence, and the appeal was dismissed.”
A sweatshirt, which, at Mr. Unger’s trial, had
been identified through microscopic comparison
as likely being his was the only direct evidence
that tied Mr. Unger to the murder.
The other two pieces of evidence used to convict
Mr. Unger were:
testimony from a jailhouse informant of
inculpatory comments allegedly made by
Mr. Unger; and
•
a confession made by Mr. Unger during an
undercover police operation.
The crown admitted that the testimony of the jailhouse informant would not be used, as it did not
meet criteria set out in the Manitoba Guidelines
for the Use of Jailhouse Informants, which was
adopted in July 2000.
However the crown continued to rely on Mr.
Unger’s confession to the police.
Mr. Unger’s confession occurred during what is
commonly known as a “Mr. Big” operation. The
“Mr. Big” operation is when undercover police
officers, posing as members of a gang, approach a
suspect with the suggestion that he is being considered to join their gang and would earn a great
deal of money as a result. They impress him with
expensive meals, flashy cars, large rolls of money
cent one may be. In a family faced with the
impossible choice between a beautiful little girl
and a gentle brother and uncle, rifts will heal
slowly. Years of having the most mundane details
of his daily existence decided by others will
require learning new skills that free men take for
granted.
But Bill Mullins-Johnson handles adversity with
a calm and poise that impresses all who meet him.
Perhaps, this is the prize for those able to move
beyond the implausible reality of liberty lost by
mistake. No bitterness consumes him; he is simply grateful that his cries of innocence have
finally been heard. He has the never faltering support of Laureena, an unbending tower of faith, as
mothers often are, in this sorry saga of a murder
that never happened. And, as in the penitentiary,
he is sustained by his native heritage, by its teachings, its rituals, its spirituality.
It has been said that the wheels of justice turn
slowly. For Bill Mullins-Johnson, the wagon has
only just lurched into motion, after twelve years
stuck in the quagmire of an imperfect justice system.
and fancy hotel rooms. The only catch is that he
has to admit to having committed a serious crime,
that being the crime under investigation. The
operation can continue over weeks or even
months and generally involves heavy pressure if
the suspect is not forthcoming with the admission
being sought.
At the time the undercover officer approached,
Mr. Unger was looking for work and having difficulty obtaining it since his arrest was well known
in his community. The officers promised him
gang membership, employment and the opportunity to earn great amounts of money. Initially Mr.
Unger denied killing Ms. Grenier, but after being
wined, dined and shown large sums of money, he
admitted to the killing. Mr. Unger testified at his
trial that he lied to the undercover officers to
impress them, to obtain employment, to earn a lot
of money and to join their gang.
Continued on page 4
Continued from page the previous page
Mr. Unger provided certain details to the undercover officers, which were not substantiated by
the facts of the case. Mr. Unger said that he had:
ensuing 12 days, Mr. Unger admitted to the
undercover officers that he had murdered the victim.
•
•
Much evidence was directed to the undercover
operation dealing with the scope and planning of
it, and whether as a result of the actions of the
undercover officers it was so unbalanced as to be
unfair.
committed the murder alone;
disposed of the sticks from the murder by
throwing them into a creek; and
•
killed the victim by a bridge, (and he took
one of the police officers to the bridge to
show him the location).
Forensic evidence tendered at trial demonstrated
that the co-accused Mr. Houlahan had blood on
his running shoes that was consistent with that of
the victim. A hair found on the deceased's pants
was consistent with having originated from Mr.
Houlahan's scalp. A pubic hair found on the
deceased's socks was consistent with having originated from the pubic hair sample of Mr. Houlahan.
Mr. Unger was one of numerous persons interviewed by the RCMP shortly after the murder. He
steadfastly denied his involvement in, or knowledge about, the crime.
Subsequent to the “Mr. Big” operation, the RCMP
interviewed more than twenty inmates to see if
any of them would claim that Mr. Unger had confessed to them. One, Jeffrey Cohen, claimed that
he had. Mr. Cohen had at some point shared a cell
with Mr. Unger while he had been held in pre-trial
custody. At trial, Mr. Cohen testified that Mr.
Unger said to him, "I killed her and I got away
with it."
Mr. Cohen first claimed this conversation took
place in an interview with the police six months
later, on May 17, 1991. At trial the defence
proved Mr. Cohen’s story was factually impossible
After Mr. Cohen gave his statement, the police
decided to undertake an undercover operation
with the objective of engaging Mr. Unger in conversations regarding the murder. On June 13 and
21, 1991, Court authorizations allowed the police
to intercept Mr. Unger’s private communications.
The undercover operation commenced June 13,
1991. On that date two undercover RCMP officers staged a breakdown of their vehicle outside
the hobby farm in rural Manitoba where Mr.
Unger was staying. During the course of the
Four undercover operatives in all were involved -all RCMP officers. One officer in particular, Larry
Tremblay, befriended Mr. Unger. The plan was to
give Mr. Unger the impression that the undercover team was involved in criminal activities and
to leave him with the idea that he could become
part of the organization. Corporal Larry Forbes
was cast in the role as the head of the organization. In the first week or so of the undercover
operation, P.C. Tremblay established a personal
relationship with Mr. Unger. He conveyed the
notion that he liked Mr. Unger and that he was out
to help him become involved in the organization.
On four separate occasions during this initial
period, Mr. Unger advised P.C. Tremblay that he
had been wrongfully imprisoned for murder. No
clarification was requested by P.C. Tremblay on
any occasion.
Kyle Unger has never wavered in his claim of
innocence.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Unger readily agreed to the
proposal for post-conviction DNA testing as soon
as it was presented to him by AIDWYC. The
results have provided him for the first time in the
twelve-and-a-half years since his conviction with
the opportunity to challenge its validity, in support of his claim of innocence. In short, AIDWYC submits that there is now good cause to
believe that Mr. Unger was convicted of a crime
he did not commit.
The sticks used in the murder could not have been
thrown into the creek, as they were left protruding
from the victim’s body and were recovered by
police. The bridge identified by Mr. Unger as the
site of the murder was not built until several
months after the murder.
Kyle Unger was released on bail on November
24th. He is residing with his parents in British
Columbia where they re-located upon their son’s
transfer to Mountain Institution. It is here that he
will await the decision of the Justice Minister,
which in great part will rely on a report to be provided by Dr. Gisili Gudjonsson, the world’s leading expert on false confessions.
He will continue the work he began in prison, producing and selling wood and stone carvings and
paintings. He has had success in selling his work
to Vancouver art galleries, and one of his uncles
has agreed to purchase the equipment that he
needs to continue this work at his parents’ home.
Please check AIDWYC’s website at
www.aidwyc.org for a more detailed summary of
Kyle Unger’s case.
PRESIDENT’S REPORT
BY PAUL COPELAND
It has been almost a
year
since
Mel
Green and I took
over as co-presidents
of AIDWYC. I am
sure Mel would
agree that neither of
us could really anticipate how busy we
would be working
on various aspects of
AIDWYC.
AIDWYC has the
good fortune of having acquired on its Board two
people who have extensive experience in financial matters and management.
Scott McMaster has been on the Board for two
years. He was drawn into AIDWYC by participating in the Illegals Motorcycle Club Freedom
Rides for Steven Crawford and Maurice Carter.
Frank Jacobs was drawn into AIDWYC’s orbit by
his friend Mel Green. Frank now serves as AIDWYC's Treasurer, and recently joined our Executive Committee.
most grateful for all the performers and other volunteers who planned and executed these two wonderful events.
The essence of AIDWYC is our work on behalf of
the wrongly convicted. This year the sad stories of
wrongly convicted persons in Canada continued.
A bit of good news is that Justice Minister Irwin
Cotler has moved much faster than his predecessors in dealing with Section 696.1 applications
under the Criminal Code.
In the past year Mr. Cotler acknowledged the likelihood that Steven Truscott, one of our adopted
cases, was a victim of a miscarriage of justice. Mr.
Cotler referred Mr. Truscott’s case to the Ontario
Court of Appeal for a fresh consideration. That
matter is pending. The Attorney General of
Ontario continues to resist the exoneration of
Steven. It never ceases to amaze me how unwilling the justice system is to admit it made a terrible
mistake.
Mr. Cotler, in the case of Jim Driskell, reached the
conclusion that Mr. Driskell was likely the victim
of a miscarriage of justice. Mr. Cotler quashed the
first-degree murder conviction and ordered a new
trial. The Attorney General of Manitoba stayed
the charges against Mr. Driskell thus ending 13
years of wrongful imprisonment.
Other than Frank Jacobs and Scott McMaster, the
Executive Committee of AIDWYC is made up of
Mel and me, David Bayliss, Peter Meier and
Jonathan Freedman. The management of AIDWYC operations seems to run much more efficiently with an Executive Committee and allows
us to use Board meetings more effectively.
In September the Ontario Crown consented to bail
pending the determination of AIDWYC’s Section
696.1 application filed on behalf of William Mullins-Johnson. Mr. Mullins-Johnson had been convicted of sexual assault and murder of his niece
and spent 12 years in prison for that crime. It now
strongly appears that there was no sexual assault
on the victim, and that there was no criminal act
that caused her death. It appears that she died
from natural causes. The Mullins-Johnson prosecution depended almost entirely on the evidence
of pathologists (and, especially that of Dr. Charles
Smith, formerly of the Sick Children’s Hospital in
Toronto), and almost all of that evidence has now
been discredited by internationally renowned
forensic experts.
Our major sustaining fundraising source continues to be the Law Foundation of Ontario. But we
have also enjoyed some success in private fundraising. In addition, we raised money at our June
Benefit and Conference in Newfoundland and at
the recent AIDWYC Benefit in Toronto. We are
David Bayliss and James Lockyer worked long
and hard on the Mullins- Johnson’s case with
assistance from pro bono private investigator’s
Sean Gladney of Investigator’s Group and
Michael Stephen formerly of King, Reed and
Associates. Harold Levy, a top reporter at the Tor-
Last year Scott, working with Peter Meier and
Win Wahrer, hired Carol Austin to assist with
financial management of AIDWYC and to help
with fundraising.
Thanks to Carol’s contribution to AIDWYC we
are now thoroughly organized financially. We
still do not have a lot of money, but at least we
now know where every penny of it is!
onto Star (and a long-time supporter of AIDWYC), wrote extensively on Dr. Smith and his
involvement in the Mullins-Johnson case. As has
happened so often in the past, the interconnected
work of the media and lawyers resulted in the
freeing of Mr. Mullins-Johnson.
An added highlight of that case for AIDWYC was
that William Mullins-Johnson (Bill) was released
from custody on September 21st, 2005, the day of
the AIDWYC Benefit at the Mod Club in Toronto. Late in the evening of September 21st, at
the Mod Club, I was speaking with Bill and Jenny
Reid, a lawyer who had juniored on his murder
trial. At about 11 o’clock Bill said to me and to
Jenny that he felt quite strange to be at the benefit,
11 years to the day and almost to the hour on
which the jury had returned the guilty verdict at
his murder trial; a guilty verdict in a case where
no murder had occurred.
Another highlight of the year for AIDWYC was a
very successful Conference held in St. Johns,
Newfoundland in June. Most of you will know
that the Lamer Inquiry has been proceeding in
Newfoundland looking at three cases of wrongful
conviction in that small province.
Jerome
Kennedy, Erin Breen, Ron Dalton, David Howell
and Win Wahrer all assisted in the organization of
the conference in Newfoundland. The presentations at the conference were excellent, but for me
the highlights were the panels of the wrongly convicted and their families, and the inspirational
speech given by Justice Marshall.
We are grateful to the countless people who dedicate their time and efforts to reviewing, researching and assisting with cases in various capacities
as well as volunteers who contribute in other
ways to AIDWYC e.g. fundraising, producing of
The Journal, investigation and office work.
AIDWYC could not continue to operate without
the passionate and dedicated work of Win Wahrer,
our Director of Client Services. In that capacity
she liaises with the wrongly convicted and their
families, and keeps hope alive in AIDWYC’s clients. We are all in her debt.
AIDWYC is always looking for assistance. Please
feel free to send us all your money and to volunteer in the important work we do.
PAUL’S PHOTOGRAPH BY GILBERT BENAMOU
TAKING IT TO THE ROCK
AIDWYC GOES TO NEWFOUNDLAND
BY RON DALTON
This past June AIDWYC organized a conference
on wrongful convictions in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador. This marked the first time the
organization hosted such an event outside of its
home-base in Toronto. The Newfoundland location was an appropriate choice given the number
of wrongly convicted individuals in that city. At
the time of the conference the Lamer Public
Inquiry was just completing hearings into the
cases of Ronald Dalton, Gregory Parsons and
Randy Druken.
The conference itself was held at the Memorial
University campus and was attended by many of
the AIDWYC directors, members of the local bar,
students, wrongly convicted individuals and their
families, crown attorneys, police officers, and
local and national media. Notably the entire class
of recruits for the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary was present.
From my perspective the conference brought
together a variety of stake holders in a non-confrontational setting to address the serious issues
surrounding wrongful convictions. I was especially pleased to have David Milgaard, Steven
Truscott, and Greg Parsons participating. The
most poignant moment of the conference was the
final panel which saw family members of
wrongly convicted individuals share the pain they
experienced.
In addition to the formal presentations of the conference, the weekend also included a fund-raising
luncheon and a concert with local and national
talent. The three days were an excellent opportu-
nity for participants to mix with each other and
there is no doubt the informal discussions and
social events proved to be invaluable. Much of
the local credit for organizing and hosting the
events goes to Erin Breen and Jerome Kennedy
together with a supporting cast of local volunteers. Win Wahrer, AIDWYC’s tireless Director
of Client Services, bore the brunt of the overall
organizing with the support of AIDWYC board
members.
The initiative of taking this conference on the
road was greatly appreciated here in St. John’s
and served to demonstrate the national scope of
the work AIDWYC performs. As someone who
has benefited from the assistance of AIDWYC I
truly appreciated the efforts of all who travelled
to St. John’s in order to bring attention to our
ongoing fight for justice here on the Rock.
CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS
Allison Dalton
Tina Parsons
Steven Truscott, Ron Dalton, David Milgaard, and Greg Parsons
PHOTOGRAPH BY THE TELEGRAM
JUSTICE WILLIAM W. MARSHALL HONOURED WITH AIDWYC AWARD
BY KIRK MAKIN
Justice William W. Marshall showed extraordinary understanding of the significance of miscarriages of justice as he accepted the prestigious
AIDWYC award at the recent "Between a Rock
and a Hard Place" Conference held in St. John's.
"There is no Richter scale of calibrating relative
depths of human tragedies," he said. "That said,
conviction of the innocent must be counted
amongst the most devastating."
"The deep lifetime scars and pain inflicted on the
wrongly convicted and their families can never
fully heal."
As Kirk Makin points out in his report on the
Conference published in the Globe and Mail,
"The former judge is respected in Canada's
wrongful-conviction movement for helping overturn the conviction of Ronald Dalton, a St. John's
resident who spent eight years in prison for a
murder he did not commit."
Makin caught the refreshing candour of Marshall's address - and his towering strength of conviction - in his report, republished below, which
ran on June 13, 2005 under the heading "Judicial
Accountability Urged in Wrongful Conviction
Cases".
ST. JOHN'S -- Trial judges should not be allowed
off the hook when someone is wrongly convicted
of a crime, former Newfoundland Court of
Appeal judge William Marshall says.
The recently retired jurist said that judicial error
can be “the ultimate cause” of a wrongful conviction, and that inquiries held later to identify mistakes are not complete unless judicial conduct has
been thoroughly examined.
“There is absolutely nothing wrong with such critiques,” Mr. Marshall told a conference of the
Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted
on Saturday.
In an interview later, Mr. Marshall said that
judges ought to avoid retreating into a “bunker
mentality,” and that they should perhaps even testify at public inquiries.
“The stakes are just too high for society, and most
particularly, for the wrongly convicted and their
families,” he said.
As long as inquiries “are measured, civil, focused
on the alleged miscarriage of justice and devoid
of aspersion, such scrutiny can be an earmark of a
healthy, democratically mature society,” he told
the conference.
The former judge is respected in Canada's wrongful-conviction movement for helping overturn the
conviction of Ronald Dalton, a St. John's resident
who spent eight years in prison for a murder he
did not commit.
In his comments, Mr. Marshall also criticized the
fact that exonerations that do not feature DNA
evidence are no longer seen as complete exonerations.
And he blasted the
Ontario government for
making Steven Truscott,
convicted 46 years ago
in the murder of 12-yearold Lynn Harper, keep
waiting to have his case
reheard at the Ontario
Court of Appeal.
Last October, federal
Justice Minister Irwin
Cotler referred Mr. Truscott's plea for exoneration
to the Court of Appeal. The Crown has refused to
concede the case, yet a hearing date is still far off.
“There is a very good, sound opinion, which I
share, that you don't need any further process at
all in that case,” Mr. Marshall said in the interview. “But if there must be, then the process of
the state must occur right away.”
The role of judges at inquiries into wrongful convictions has long been a sore point; the inquiries
are almost always set up in such a way as to preclude close examination of any shortcomings of
the trial judge involved.
Mr. Marshall said respecting judicial independence is important, but not if it means shielding
the judiciary from public scrutiny.
“It is difficult to perceive how any credible
inquiry into a wrongful conviction could be commissioned without expectation that every stage of
the judicial process leading to the miscarriage —
including the judiciary's acquittal of its responsibilities — would be vetted,” Mr. Marshall told his
audience.
The subject arose recently at the Lamer Inquiry,
which is examining various elements of the
wrongful convictions of Newfoundlanders Gregory Parsons, Randy Druken and Mr. Dalton.
AIDWYC lawyer Jerome Kennedy has tried
unsuccessfully to have judges put in the witness
box, and to have their courtroom conduct and rulings made a central issue.
Mr. Kennedy has also been critical of the inquiry
for not looking at the Dalton case thoroughly
because Mr. Dalton was not cleared by DNA.
Instead, he was acquitted at his retrial amid overwhelming evidence that his wife, Brenda, actually
choked to death on a morsel of cereal, not
because Mr. Dalton strangled her.
Mr. Marshall said it “heaps injustice upon injustice” to deny a man such as Mr. Dalton all the
benefits of an exoneration — including compensation — simply because DNA did not factor into
the case.
“This man spent eight years in jail, but he should
never have spent one day,” Mr. Marshall said.
“He's just as entitled to compensation as anyone
acquitted through DNA . . . It is singularly dangerous for such a notion to be adopted as the sole
criterion of wrongful conviction.”
Marshall saluted AIDWYC in his acceptance for
having "amassed an impressive record in pursuing its mission of reducing the likelihood of miscarriages of justice and the overturning of
wrongful convictions."
"Such is the importance of your (AIDWYC's)
mission," he said. "You have well earned the
respect and support you have received for your
efforts in defence of the wrongly convicted."
"I value this award for the source from whence it
comes."
THE MEDIA AND ADVOCATES FOR THE WRONGLY CONVICTED
BY KIRK MAKIN
In a wrongful conviction case, the
press can be your
best friend or your
worst enemy. They
can push and prod
and draw attention to
a case that smells
bad, or they can help
to railroad a potentially innocent person with biased or
reckless reporting. They will be nowhere to be
found when most needed, only to tear up your
front lawn with camera trucks when you no longer
do.
Sometimes, they do legwork and original
research. Other times, they gladly accept what
defence lawyers and private investigators have
assembled or gotten disclosed, publish it, and be
only too happy to call it their own.
They can be a truly exasperating bunch.
The first watershed point is the trial. As often as
not the press become a multi-headed hydra that
shares a common brain, which is not an image
you will want to dwell on for too long.
This doesn’t mean coverage is always uniform, of
course, but there does tend to be a conventional
wisdom about guilt and innocence. And nowadays, with so much trial coverage done by way of
column and opinion piece, God help us if jurors
and the public truly ARE swayed by the things
they read.
The question of how, why and when those fighting for the wrongly convicted approach the press
has always fascinated me. How much thought
actually goes into these decisions? What works,
and what doesn’t?
Let’s say the potential innocent man or woman
has been convicted – with or without the kindly
ministrations of the all-knowing media. What
does a defence lawyer or other advocate do? Does
he or she approach one reporter or media outlet?
Two? More? And how does one go about doing
so?
I suspect that in smaller centres, offering quasiexclusive access to the information to one reporter
can work well. Individual media love to latch onto
a story and call it their own. Visions of awards
play through the minds of reporters; newsroom
managers are able to miraculously free up space
that would never be available for a mere followup on someone else’s story. And make no mistake
– reporters and editors may enter their profession
with altruistic motives, but they are very, very
competitive people.
The downside of dealing exclusively with one
reporter or media outlet is that, firstly, the powersthat-be in government and the prosecutorial
branch may ignore the case because coverage is
too isolated to have the necessary impact. Second,
the studied indifference displayed by competing
media can even morph into hostility. Reporters,
sorry to say, are extremely prone to the shortcomings of ordinary human nature. Add the pressure
of competition to that, and some of the highmindedness and noble purpose can evaporate. The
reality of answering to scowling editors tends to
become a higher priority.
A reporter who has been left out of the defence
loop can be someone to be wary of. I offer you an
example from the second Guy Paul Morin trial, in
London, Ontario. It was early 1992, and the big
city reporters – all two of us – had become fairly
sure that something was badly awry with this
murder prosecution. The Crowns and police no
longer even spoke to us, so convinced were they
that our daily stories were highlighting only the
worst of their case.
Instead, they gravitated to the court reporter from
the local newspaper. They buttered him up shamelessly, gave him special access, assured him that
he was the only honest reporter there. Lo and
behold, it worked. His coverage become so proCrown during that trial that comparing newspaper
accounts every morning was a startling experience.
Those authorities were so, so smart. They knew
which paper the jurors were reading every morning, and it sure wasn’t the Globe and Mail or the
Star. I’m not suggesting that this was the only reason Mr. Morin was convicted, but I do think the
daily dose of reinforcement for the prosecution
was a factor. When jurors are reaching conclusions, it doesn’t hurt to know that the local media
finds the case to be solid.
Some of the more astute counsel and families or
wrongly convicted people have employed a sharing system when it comes to dealing with reporters, bringing two, or even three, reporters with a
genuine interest into a case. I recall sitting in
James Lockyer’s living room several years ago on
a Sunday morning with a Star reporter and Joyce
Milgaard, being given new information on
David’s case. Our stories appeared simultaneously and had double the punch.
In fact, I think the Milgaard case probably
remains the model for a team of advocates carefully farming out story angles and information so
that a critical mass of local and national press felt
included and enthusiastic.
Far be it from me to say that I would never like to
be out front on a good story. I do. But I must also
concede the point when a clever approach has
worked.
One reporter or twelve, every story must have an
angle that will engage an editor. For media that
have managed to claim a story as ‘their own’, the
actual newsworthiness of the angle becomes less
important.
Angles fall into two general categories: ‘bad guy’
stories that expose the disintegrating case against
someone – such as concealed police reports and
recanting witnesses; or ‘personality’ angles – the
ones that focus on the ordeal of the victim, or the
inmate behind bars still waiting for someone to
heed his pleas for help.
THE MEDIA AND ADVOCATES FOR THE WRONGLY CONVICTED
These stories can only be done so often, of course,
before the well runs dry or the media loses its oftfleeting enthusiasm. Systemic problems, too, can
only be examined so many times. I well remember the final stages of the Kaufman inquiry into
Mr. Morin’s wrongful conviction. As the testimony moved into expert witnesses speaking
about the ingredients of wrongful convictions, my
editors lost interest and let me know it was time to
call it a day. No obvious villains, no story.
Nowadays, we have a new problem. More and
more governments are agreeing to release sensitive and useful information or documents to the
defence or AIDWYC. But only on the condition
that they keep it completely confidential. How
can they say no? On the other hand, it prevents
them from applying that all-important public
pressure through the media that speeds up an
exoneration. Somebody had better figure out a
way around this one, but it may not be easy.
I conclude as I started. The reporter can be your
best friend, your worst enemy, or an indifferent
bystander. Which it will be can depend a great
deal on the wisdom of your strategy, your insight
into human nature and your understanding of
angles that advance a story or resonate. It will
also depend on your ability to withstanding the
frustration of having your case ignored or mishandled by the press, and still keep coming back.
I do not condone the fleeting interest of the
media; the cynical story judgment; the sad reality
that people serving long sentences can be treated
impersonally. I don’t particularly care for the fact
that those potentially wrongly convicted can
become like news widgets that fit or do not fit
newsroom priorities, depending on whether
Michael Jackson wore pyjamas to court yesterday
or Belinda Stonach changes parties again.
So, there is it is, the bloody media. Can’t live with
it. Can’t live without it.
THE ROYAL NEWFOUNDLAND CONSTABULARY ATTENDS THE AIDWYC CONFERENCE
BY ROBERT JOHNSTON
The Royal Newfoundland
Constabulary (RNC) participated in AIDWYC’s
2005 Wrongful Conviction
Conference, “Between a
Rock and a Hard Place,”
held at Memorial University, St. John’s, NL. Members from the RNC’s
Executive Team, Major
Crime/Sexual
Offence
Units and the 2005 Police Recruit Class attended
the day-long conference.
The Conference provided insight and fostered
debate on wrongful convictions. The forum
allowed the many stakeholders an opportunity to
articulate their views and hear first hand the
human cost associated with miscarriages of justice.
The police officers and cadets who attended were
captivated with the presentation by the victims of
wrongful convictions and their families. The Con-
ference emphasized the fact that the police have
been entrusted with the responsibility to conduct
fair and competent investigations and the consequences incurred if they fail to do so.
Conference presenter, Gregory Parsons, who was
wrongfully convicted of his mother’s death in
1994, specifically referenced the police cadets
and reminded them of the tremendous responsibility they have in their future profession. He
asked that they keep an open mind and treat people with kindness and respect.
Newfoundland and Labrador, much like other
provinces in Canada, has had cases of wrongful
convictions. After a two-year inquiry, former
Chief Justice of Canada, Antonio Lamer, will
soon be releasing his findings concerning three
homicide cases that occurred here in our province.
The RNC investigated two of these three homicides that lead to the arrest of Gregory Parsons
and Randy Druken. In both cases, we were also
responsible for the successful re-investigations.
Numerous inquiries have examined and reported
various factors that cause wrongful convictions.
We have all heard of the pitfalls associated with
wrongful conviction: tunnel vision, noble cause
corruption, false confessions, jailhouse informants, eyewitness testimony, education, and
expert testimony. Communication is one key
issue interwoven through all of these factors
resulting in wrongful convictions.
The one thing stakeholders within the Justice System have in common is that no one wishes to see
another person wrongfully convicted.
This Conference encouraged everyone involved
in the criminal justice system to work together to
be constantly vigilant and on guard against factors
that can contribute to the miscarriage of justice.
I would like to thank the law firm of Simmonds
Kennedy of St. John’s, Newfoundland, organizers
of the Conference “Between a Rock and a Hard
Place” for extending an invitation to the RNC to
participate in the Conference.
A CONSTABLE’S VIEW POINT
BY TAMMY MADDEN
My name is Tammy
Madden, one of the
newest constables
with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary (RNC). During
this past year of
intense training with
Memorial University of Newfoundland and the RNC,
our recruit class was
introduced to an assembly of participants within
the criminal justice system. One of the most
memorable experiences for our class was attending the 2005 AIDWYC Wrongful Conviction
Conference held in St. John's, Newfoundland.
The conference had a major impact on everyone
in that it placed a personal face on the wrongful
conviction issue.
During the one-day conference we heard views
from across the professional criminal justice spectrum including lawyers and police officers. RNC
Deputy Chief Johnston, Criminal Operations, was
among the guest speakers. It was interesting to
hear the individual concerns about the issues surrounding wrongful convictions in our country.
My classmates and I will never forget the sad stories told by members of the panel who spent
countless time behind bars in addition to the continuing battle to regain their innocence in the eyes
of the public long after being cleared by the justice system. There is no doubt that the most
impacting stories came from those personally
affected by wrongful convictions. I will always
remember the faces of Mr. Greg Parsons and his
wife Tina as they relived his ordeal of being
wrongfully convicted in the death of his mother,
and their hope that our class would learn a valuable lesson from his misfortune. Mr. Greg Parsons
reminded us of the important role that we as
police officers fulfill, and that we must not take
lightly the enormous power to take away a person's freedom.
As a new police officer with the RNC, I feel that
it is my duty to continue to educate myself and
others with the goal of eliminating wrongful convictions. A successful criminal justice system
involves all spheres of the system working
together and learning from mistakes to ensure that
justice is served. I feel that the 2005 AIDWYC
Wrongful Conviction Conference demonstrates
that police, lawyers, and the wrongfully convicted
are willing to work together to ensure that justice
is served.
STEVEN’S LONG JOURNEY FOR JUSTICE
STEVEN: A PERSPECTIVE
shown in Guelph I knew I had to see it there at
least once. Fortunately I was able to secure tickets for the AIDWYC benefit night. The play had
changed from Calgary! Because the young men
who played Steve at different ages had been able
to meet Steve and visit with him for about an
hour, their performances changed. In Calgary
they seemed angry and resentful, but in Guelph
they showed Steve's true personality. That of a
man who is serene and happy in his life, who has
no time to hold grudges and realizes that anger
only hurts the one who is angry. All Steve wants
is what he should have gotten to begin with. Justice and his good name back.
BY STACEY DEFRAINE
The first mention I heard of the play "Steven, the
Steven Truscott Story" was on Oct. 28/04 when
Justice Minister Cotler referred Steve's case back
to the Ontario Court of Appeal". One of the people interviewed by CBC Newsworld was our
local movie critic Louis B Hobson. He said at
that time he had been working on a play regarding
Steve's case and hoped to soon have it finished
and in production. I emailed him immediately and
asked him to please let me know when it was finished as Steve's case was near and dear to me as
my mother had been friends with both Steve and
Lynne.
On Jan. 3/05 I received an email from Louis saying that the play would be running in Calgary
from January 11 to January 21. This time frame
would coincide with Steve's 60th birthday. I
obtained tickets for the performance for my 19
year old daughter and myself. Although I had
read both "Until you are Dead" and "The trial of
Steven Truscott" I was totally unprepared for the
rush of emotions that I felt when I saw that first
performance. From beginning to end I was overwhelmed with feelings of sadness, anger and disbelief that something like this could have gone on
in Canada during the 20th century. My daughter
and I both cried for the boy whose innocence was
taken from him at age 14 and for a young girl
whose life was cut short at the tender age of 12. I
cried also for all those people who loved these
children.
Brianne Kelsick as Lynne Harper and
Matthew Buzahora as Young Steven
PHOTOGRAPH BY BOB HOUSSER
After the play ended that evening I spoke with
some of the actors and told them that their compelling performances should be shown in southern Ontario where this nightmare began. During
the Calgary run I saw the play with several different family members and friends ... a total of five
times. When I heard the play was going to be
I have seen the Play 7 times in total, and I can
honestly say that each time I have seen it I have
left the theatre with a whole new perspective on
this case and what it means to me, not just as a
friend of the Truscott family, but what it means to
be living in a country where something so tragic
occurred even before my birth, and what is happening to Steven Truscott and his family today
and what has happened to him over the last 46
years. This play is a work of art that I honestly
think everyone should have opportunity to see.
The harsh reality is that what Steve went through
and is still going through, what Lynne Harper
went through, and the families of both Steve and
Lynne went through, is a terrible and tragic loss.
Our justice system needs to realize that a young
man was wrongfully convicted, a young woman
died tragically, and that this matter needs to be
dealt with in an expeditious manner.
KAUFMAN REPORT
On November 28, 2005 Justice Minister Irwin
Cotler made public an edited copy of the public
investigative report prepared by the Honourable
Fred Kaufman into the murder conviction of
Steven Truscott.
To obtain a copy of the report on CD-ROM,
please call (613) 957-4207.
The executive summary of the report is available
at http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/ccr/.
STEVEN: THE STEVEN TRUSCOTT STORY
BY ROB MCKAY
As a citizen of Guelph I have followed the plight
of Steven Truscott for many years. When I
learned that a play had been written about him
and was performing in Calgary, I knew that we
had to have it here in Steven Truscott’s home
town. I am privileged to be the manager of the
River Run Centre, Guelph’s premier performing
arts centre.
Steven Truscott’s grandson Jeff Bowers, left,
as Flight-Sgt. Johnson and Matthew Buzahora
as Young Steven in Steven: The Steven Truscott Story, played at Guelph’s River Run Centre in October.
PHOTOGRAPH BY BOB HOUSSER
Why a play about this Canadian travesty of justice? From the earliest of times theatre was
staged not only to entertain, but to instruct, motivate, persuade, and even change the audience. It
is my fervent hope that this play motivated and
persuaded the nearly 4,000 people who saw it to
demand better from our justice system.
The first act of the play begins with the infamous
bike ride and details the hastened arrest, trial and
conviction. It contains a very powerful re-enactment scene in which the prosecutor piles conjecture upon conjecture, until he has a totally
implausible theory of how Steven could have
committed the murder in the short time that he
was with Lynn Harper, the murder victim. He
takes those facts which suit his convenience,
hides things that don’t support his theory and
changes facts as necessary to support an absurd
theory. The Act ends with Steven’s conviction
and sentence to hang.
ACT II follows his time at Kingston Penitentiary
and includes Steven’s subjection to truth serums
and LSD, in an attempt to have him confess to the
murder. It also goes through his appeal and
finally his parole.
The closing monologue tells much about Steven
Truscott as a person. Here is a man who will not
be left bitter by the injustice perpetrated against
him. Rather he speaks about the friends he has
made after leaving Kingston – those who knew
his story and those who did not. He speaks of
finding Marlene and raising three children who
never doubted either his love or his innocence.
He shows his thankfulness for the thirty-five
years of happiness since leaving prison, but vows
to never give up the fight to have his name and
reputation cleared.
I was very pleased to be able to present this play
but also for the opportunity to support AIDWYC
with this production. One performance was
selected as a fundraiser to which guests paid an
extra fee to support AIDWYC. After the performance we held a reception and were treated to a
few words by James Lockyer and Steven Truscott
himself. A good time was had by all and in
excess of $5,000 was raised for AIDWYC.
There were 22 performances of the play at River
JOURNEY FOR JUSTICE
Run Centre, written and directed by Louis HobBY RYAN TRUSCOTT
The past five months
have been exceptionally busy, rewarding
ones for my family and
me. Events taking us
from the east coast of
Newfoundland to the
western province of
Alberta have been
among the highlights of
our agenda.
On June 10th my dad and I left by plane for St.
John’s, Newfoundland to attend a three-day
AIDWYC conference. We were greeted warmly
at the airport and from that moment on the hospitality and kindness of the residents of St. John’s
was overwhelming and something we will never
forget. We met many interesting people there
including both crown and defence lawyers,
judges, the Chief of Police, police cadets, other
wrongly convicted persons and some of their
family members.
I was fortunate enough to be on a panel with
members of Ronald Dalton’s and Greg Parson’s
families. Our stories were similar in context, for
we all share a common bond – both hurt and pride
of our loved ones involved in a wrongful conviction. Dad was on a panel with David Milgaard,
Ronald Dalton and Greg Parsons. We were all
treated to a lobster fest at the home of Jerome
Kennedy on June 12th. The three days came and
went quickly but have left us with very fond
memories.
On July 1st our family held a Canada Day party at
our home with about 120 guests. We renewed old
friendships over drinks and Canada Day cake.
Our family is so proud of our country and the
wonderful Canadian people in it.
River Run Centre, located here in Guelph,
Ontario, held a special night on Saturday, October
8th with a showing of the play “Steven” followed
by an AIDWYC fundraising reception.
son of Calgary, but this particular night was an
event I will never forget. There were over 230
people in attendance. During the play, our family
sat near the back of the theatre, once again reliving my father’s young life. Seeing it on stage was
entirely different than reading or watching a documentary. It seemed more real to me. The cast
and crew of the play, and the audience, including
a number of AIDWYC members, attended the
reception. Two of my dad’s lawyers were in
attendance, Hersh Wolch and James Lockyer, the
latter of whom gave a brief speech, followed by
my dad. Rob MacKay of River Run Centre presented James Lockyer with a cheque for
AIDWYC from the fundraising event.
Steven Truscott, Ron Dalton, David Milgaard
and Greg Parsons
October 27th found dad and I flying once again.
This time we headed west to Calgary, Alberta.
We landed in Calgary just in time to be taken to
the venue for the showing of the play “Steven”
with the Calgary cast and crew. Hersh Wolch, dad
and I took part in a question-and-answer session
regarding the play.
The following morning we met with the group
from our workshop panel at the Canadian Criminal Justice Association’s 30th National Congress,
which was attended by experts from around the
world. Our panel consisting of Hersh Wolch,
lawyer, Mark Green of the Criminal Conviction
Review Group, Janne Holmgren, DNA lawyer,
my dad and myself, spoke briefly and then
answered questions. We left Calgary within
hours of that panel discussion in order to be home
late Friday evening, as Saturday the family was
taking mom and dad out to dinner in celebration
of their 35th Wedding Anniversary.
A group of devoted friends got together and presented mom and dad with an all-inclusive weekend at a condo in Blue Mountain’s Village in
Collingwood, Ontario. By all reports the weekend was the break they needed and enjoyed so
much.
On Friday, November 25th at Humberview High
School, in Bolton, Ontario, teacher, George
Allain, and his students held a symposium on
wrongful convictions attended by students from
various cities across Ontario. Workshops were
lead by judges, senators, criminologists, detectives and others. AIDWYC’s Win Wahrer held
two workshops: one with students from Humberview High School in Bolton and one with students from John F. Ross High School in Guelph.
Jeff and Mary Yanchus, high school teachers
from John F. Ross and active supporters and initiators of the post card campaigns in support of my
dad, were the leaders for their school. Mac Stienburg and Les Horne joined mom, dad and I in a
workshop. Mac was padre of Collins Bay Penitentiary when dad was there and later became a
parole officer and then member of the National
Parole Board. Les Horne was a guard at the Hillcrest Training School in Guelph during dad’s
incarceration from 1960 to l963.
Mom and dad have very busy schedules as you
can see. Mom does not like flying, which gives
me the opportunity to go with my dad on these
extended trips. I feel honored representing her
and I know that she is home working hard on the
computer and adding pages to her book, “Chasing
Justice”. I also know that home is where she
feels the most comfortable.
BOOKS REVIEWED
“CONFESSIONS OF AN INNOCENT MAN” BY WILLIAM SAMPSON
REVIEWED BY WIN WAHRER
William Sampson is a man of
great
resolve
and
commitment to the
truth. He is a
dual British and
Canadian citizen who was a
marketing consultant for a
bank in Riyadh
when he was
arrested
on
December 17,
2000 for the car
bombing and murder of British friend Chris Rodway.
William Sampson speaks in graphic detail of the
mental, emotional and physical torture he
endured at the hands of his Saudi captors in
“Confessions of an Innocent Man: Torture and
Survival in a Saudi Prison”.
Mr. Sampson’s book reveals in painful, agonizing
detail what it was like to be held in a Saudi prison
for almost three years (963 days in solitary confinement) where he was tortured, raped and
deprived of sleep for weeks on end until he
finally confessed to a crime he did not commit.
He writes in vivid terms about despair and his
dismal future.
inability, or lack of desire, to protect its citizens in
other countries.
"I hoped that the executioner's blade would be
sharp, his arm strong, and his aim sure; beyond
that, the prospect of death offered not fear but
relief."
The book took a year to write. Writing the book
was not therapeutic; it was painful and quite frustrating. Asked why he wrote it, Mr. Sampson was
quick to reply “to get off public security” and
“make public a testimony of what happened to
me in prison.” He currently lives in England
where he has been unable to find work since his
release.
“I had been formally sentenced to death by al
haad, a brutal means of execution that involves
being affixed to two stakes, being partially
beheaded, left to die slowly over a period of
hours."
William Sampson is lucky to be alive. Without
the intervention of the British government in
August 2003 and his own courage and determination he undoubtedly would have been beheaded.
While in prison Mr. Sampson suffered a heart
attack. He needs to deal with a myriad of other
health problems as a result of his imprisonment
and inhumane treatment.
Mr. Sampson has been on a book launch tour,
which brought him to The World’s Biggest Book
Store in Toronto on November 30th. He read
from his book and answered questions posed by
audience members as well as by the evening’s
host, Heather Reisman, who admitted she had
been unable to put the book down and has been
promoting it ever since.
Mr. Sampson is articulate, forthright and brutally
honest about his capture, torture, and finding his
own humanity as well as his disappointment and
loss of faith in the Canadian government and its
AIDWYC’S LIBRARY
AIDWYC is in the process
of creating a library. Anyone having books, magazines, video or audio tapes,
news articles, or other
items that you would like
to donate to the AIDWYC
library please contact Win
Wahrer at 416-504-7500 or
[email protected]
Mr.
Sampson
will be entering
Queen’s University in Kingston,
Ontario next fall
to study Human
Rights Law. He
is now devoted,
he said, to exposing the truth and
defending
the
rights of others
who have been
similarly abused.
Vancouver-based Paperny Films will produce a
theatrical documentary based on Mr. Sampson’s
ordeal.
Publishers McClelland & Stewart have contracted
Mr. Sampson to write another book which will be
on the bookshelves in 2007.
BOOKS REVIEWED
“SEARCHING FOR JUSTICE” BY FRED KAUFMAN
REVIEWED BY HAROLD LEVY
I had a clearly defined objective in mind when I
read Justice Fred Kaufman’s autobiography
“Searching for Justice” recently published by the
Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History. I
wanted to learn what kindled the consummate
interest he has demonstrated towards wrongly
accused persons such as Guy Paul Morin and
Steven Truscott.
The answer came early in the book when Kaufman describes his reaction to the comments of the
bigoted commander of the British internment
camp where he had been sent as an enemy alien
when he was only 16 years old after having been
spirited out of Austria in 1939.
Watching a group of internees with skullcaps and
curly side-whiskers arrive at his camp, the man
was heard to say, “I had no idea there were so
many Jews among the Nazis.”
“How does one feel in a situation like that?
Angry? Upset? Resentful?” Kaufman asks rhetorically.
“The answer is a mix of these and similar emotions, but worst of all is the slowly dawning realization that nothing can be done: The state has
spoken and no one is prepared to listen to us. We
know we are innocent; we know this is a horrible
error; we cry out but there is no one to hear us,”
he replies.
“Many years later, when I was called upon by the
Ontario government to inquire into the wrongful
conviction of an innocent person, I could understand the accused’s agony. He knew that he was
not guilty of the horrible crime, but no one in
authority believed him.”
Another explanation for Kaufman’s preoccupation with injustice is to be found early in his
book. He has personally experienced the knock
on the door, which is all too often the first step on
the path to injustice. Kaufman had been relatively happily housed with a British family when
Germany invaded Holland and Belgium in May
1940, and the British government began detaining
all Germans and Austrians between the ages of
sixteen and sixty.
“My turn came mid-morning on the 12th,” he
writes. “A Superintendent Huitson of the Durham
County Constabulary knocked on the door and,
quite apologetically, told us that he had a most
unpleasant duty to perform. Would I please pack
a few things, enough for two or three days…”
After dealing with aspects of his personal life, his
careers as a journalist, lawyer and appeal court
judge – and his views on capital punishment
which will not surprise any reader of the
AIDWYC Journal – Kaufman returns to the days
of his internment when he discusses how he felt
when asked to conduct the Morin Inquiry.
“When I was
interned
in
England in 1940,
I knew that I was
not a spy, but how
do you convey this
truth to others?,”
he writes. “Morin
had maintained
his
innocence
throughout
his
ordeal, but he
couldn’t convince
the police; and
while he did convince the first
jury, he couldn’t convince the Court of Appeal
and the Supreme Court of Canada.”
of the lawyers, we might never have found out
about this.”
But Kaufman says the most “wrenching” day of
the inquiry came on December 16, 1997, when
AIDWYC, through Marlys Edwardh, presented a
“panel of the innocents” including Joyce Milgaard, Rubin Carter, Rolando Cruz, Patrick
Maguire, Joyce Ann Brown, and Rick Norris.
“What those people had to say truly put ‘the
human face’, as Marlys Edwardh has told us, on
the pain and tragedy of the wrongly convicted,”
Kaufman writes.
Kaufman also refers to AIDWYC’s involvement
in the struggle to vindicate Steven Truscott – the
case that wouldn’t go away – with particular reference to the work done on behalf of the Association by Philip Campbell, Marlys Edwardh and
James Lockyer.
Kaufman wades into the debate over his controversial decision to recommend that the Truscott
case be sent to the Ontario Court of Appeal
instead of proceeding by way of a new trial by
citing a George Jonas column from the National
Post.
“The Ontario Court of Appeal is the forum where
justice can be done, and also be seen to be done,”
wrote Jonas. “Anything else would amount to
using the same cracks in the system to exonerate
Mr. Truscott as were used to railroad him fortyfive years ago.”
“And it wasn’t even up to him to do the convincing because it was the crown’s burden to prove
him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” he continues. “He knew that he wasn’t guilty, as I had
known that I wasn’t a danger to national security,
but how to persuade someone else?”
“As we used to say in the Court of Appeal,”I
agree, writes Kaufman, who, whether you agree
with him or not, is certainly encouraging a
vigourous debate.
Kaufman barely hides his horror at the quality of
the police investigation that led to the murder
charge against Morin when, after discussing the
notorious cigarette butt evidence, he says, “And
this in a first-degree murder investigation!”
Readers of “Searching for Justice” will discover
why Fred Kaufman deserves the love and support
of those people who demand fairness from the
administration of justice and carry the torch for
the wrongly accused.
Kaufman says in an epilogue that the love and
support of his family means more than he can say.
He also expresses shock that crucial fibre samples
had been contaminated by the then internationally
renowned Centre for Forensic Sciences and “had
it not been for an anonymous tip received by one
CRITICAL CASES
LOUISIANA TRAGEDY: ROBERT HILLIARD
BY WIN WAHRER
Robert Hilliard’s life could hardly get worse…
He had once faced the electric chair, had endured
26 years behind bars for a murder he did not commit and no courts were impervious to his plea of
innocence.
Then Hurricane Katrina struck.
When Hilliard was 13 years old, he and another
boy stole a car, took it for a joy ride and were
eventually stopped by the police who discovered
a gun under the front seat. The police wanted the
two young boys to say that it was their gun. Robert Hilliard and his friend refused to admit the gun
belonged to them. Robert Hilliard was beaten
quite maliciously by the police officers, as was
his friend. They were both taken to a youth facility where an honest youth guard saw Robert Hilliard’s friend get stabbed by a police officer and
intervened and order the police officers to leave,
which they did. Later, when the owner of the car
was located, he admitted the gun belonged to him.
Robert Hilliard’s parents filed a civil suit against
the police officers responsible for the beatings.
The owner of the car and the youth guard testified
on behalf of Robert Hilliard and his friend. Robert Hilliard and his friend won the lawsuit.
The judge presiding over the case advised Hilliard’s parent to relocate Robert out of state due to
retribution that may be acted upon their son by
the racist police officer. Robert Hilliard’s parents
sent him to live with an aunt but after six months
Robert became home sick and returned to reside
with his parents in New Orleans. Young Robert
soon found that he was constantly being picked
up and harassed by the police and charged with
bogus crimes. He was often referred to as the
“nigger who got our white boys fired.”
Robert Hilliard was originally facing the electric
chair on a first-degree murder charge. On January
22, 1980, Mr. Hilliard was convicted at the age of
22 in the state of Louisiana of second-degree
murder after a trial that incredulously lasted one
day. Mr. Hilliard has been languishing in prison
for 26 years for a crime he did not commit.
The key witness in Mr. Hilliard’s case was Mrs.
Jefferson, the victim’s wife who was said to be in
a mental institution and thus unable to testify.
Detective Artique, the officer in charge of the
investigation into her husband’s murder testified
as to her description of what had happened. It
was later discovered that Mrs. Jefferson was not
in a mental institution and was quite capable of
testifying. Her description of the two assailants
did not match Robert Hilliard. It was also discovered that Detective Artique misstated the content
of her statement. Since that statement was not
disclosed to the defense there was no way to challenge his evidence, which the prosecution relied
on to corroborate the evidence of the two accomplices who made up the entire case against Robert
Hilliard.
The original suspects in the murder were Cornell
Hodges, who was arrested by the police for three
armed robberies. He told police that he had been
at the scene of the crime but that Robert Hilliard
had pulled the trigger. He pled to being an accessory after the fact and received a 2½-year sentence as well as seven years for two armed
robberies. He implicated Willie Smith who corroborated his story. Willie Smith was never
charged with any crime.
The Evidence At Trial
Cornell Hodges testified at trial that he and Willie
Smith had stopped by the home of Marie Alvaris,
Mr. Hilliard’s girlfriend, where Mr. Hilliard was
at the time. According to them, all three took a
ride in Ms. Alvaris’ green Grand Prix to look for
narcotics. According to Mr. Hodges, Mr. Hilliard
told him to the stop the car at a car wash where he
had spotted Mr. Jefferson, a stranger. It was then
said that Mr. Hilliard proceeded to take a gun
from his waistband and exited the car with the
intention of robbing Mr. Jefferson. Mr. Hodges
and Mr. Smith waited in the car. Mr. Hilliard
returned and told them he had shot someone. The
three drove off and, according to Mr. Hodges, Mr.
Hilliard threw the gun away. The gun was never
found. No money was taken from Mr. Jefferson
even though the prosecutor’s theory was that Mr.
Jefferson was shot in the process of a robbery.
The prosecutor then theorized that Mr. Jefferson
fought back and refused to give up the money.
There were no eyewitnesses to the robbery.
Mr. Hilliard called five alibi witnesses; each testified that they had seen him at Ms. Alvaris’ house
on the day of the killing. Ms. Alvaris had been
arrested at the same time as he was and gave a
statement to the police that Mr. Hilliard had confessed to killing Mr. Jefferson and that she, Mr.
Hodges and Mr. Hilliard had disposed of the gun
10 days after the murder. At trial she recanted
claiming that the police and the district attorney’s
office had made threats against her. However, she
continued to maintain she told the truth about the
disposal of the gun. She stood trial on perjury
charges and upon conviction spent one year in
prison. She still maintains that she told the truth
at trial.
On February 27, 1980, before Mr. Hilliard was to
be sentenced, his trial counsel filed a motion for a
new trial based on the State's failure to disclose
the fact that Mrs. Jefferson was present at the
time of the shooting. This had been the subject of
a pre-trial discovery request. On March 14, 1980
the State claimed that she was not available for
trial because she was confined to a mental hospital and the motion for new trial was denied. On
March 18th, Mr. Hilliard was sentenced to life
with no chance of parole.
On April 24, 1980, the defense discovered a new
witness, David Daliet. He signed an affidavit stating that:
•
•
he heard a shot and saw a white Trans-Am
pull out;
he saw two men get into the Trans-Am;
Continued on page 18
CRITICAL CASES
LOUISIANA TRAGEDY: ROBERT HILLIARD
•
•
•
both men were light skinned;
they were 5'3 and 5'6;
at that time he heard a lady yelling about her
husband
Mr. Hilliard at that time was 6’1”, 135 pounds
and dark skinned.
A hearing was held on August 21 and 27, 1980.
Mr. Daliet testified, as did Mrs. Jefferson. No
new trial was granted.
In 1982, a federal habeas petition was filed in the
United States Eastern District Court. The petition
was denied. The reviewing judge took the position that, since neither David Daliet nor Mrs. Jefferson saw the actual shooting, but could only say
that they saw two men standing by a white TransAm and that the Trans-Am drove out of the car
wash after the shots were fired, their evidence
was not sufficient to warrant a new trial.
In 1985, Mr. Hilliard obtained the initial police
report authored by the investigating and arresting
officer. This report contained the original statement from Mrs. Jefferson where she stated that
she saw two men shoot at her husband and drive
away in a white Trans-Am.
The reviewing court dismissed habeas relief,
again on the grounds that trial counsel had at all
times been aware of the contents of the initial
police report and explored the issue both at trial
and Motion for New Trial. This decision ignored
the fact that counsel had not been able to refresh
Mrs. Jefferson’s memory with her original statement at the time of that hearing, because it had
not yet been disclosed.
In 1995, Mr. Hilliard was able to gain access to
the district attorney’s files as result of a 1992
court decision. In the file was the "Coroner's Day
record" which contained a statement which was
inconsistent with the State's theory of the case, as
Continued from page the previous page
well as a copy of original statements from the
State's two witnesses which contradicted their
evidence at trial concerning the description of the
“murder weapon” which they had seen.
In 1996, Mr. Hilliard was granted a new trial on
the grounds that the State had failed to disclose
favourable and material evidence. The Louisiana
Supreme Court overturned that order. The court
appeared to consider that the issue of the investigating officer's evidence and Mrs. Jefferson’s post
trial testimony had been fully litigated on appeal
in 1982. This is, of course, incorrect because the
defense did not have any of the crucial statements
at that time.
In 1995, the defense learned that the two "accomplices" had made statements at the time of their
arrest in which they described the gun, which
according to them Mr. Hilliard had used to kill
Mr. Jefferson. One described it as "blue steel
automatic revolver" and the other said it was a
"black automatic with brown grips" At trial, 90
days later, both testified that they couldn’t
describe the gun, except that it was a .38.
The prosecution did not advise trial counsel that
Mrs. Jefferson had been present at the shooting
until the day of the trial. (The trial lasted one day.)
In addition, they had a statement given immediately after the shooting in which Mrs. Jefferson
told Detective Artique that:
“she was sitting in her car when suddenly a Negro
male subject not known by her suddenly appeared
and fired a gun in the direction of Mr. Jefferson.
She observed a second subject with a gun and
looked in the direction of her husband and saw
her husband stumble and fall clutching his chest.
She also told the Detective that the two men left
in a white Trans-Am. “
AIDWYC endorsed Robert Hilliard’s case after a
thorough review on April 20, 2004.
Robert Hilliard suffers from high blood pressure,
which is only exasperated when he has to work in
the scorching heat of a Louisiana summer. Mr.
Hilliard is in desperate need of help; he currently
does not have an attorney and is in dire need of
one.
Robert Hilliard, along with many other citizens of
the state of Louisiana, was deeply affected by the
ravages and destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina. It would be several agonizing weeks before
he would find out that his elderly mother and
other family members had been relocated to other
states. Due to Hurricane Katrina, Robert Hilliard’s children, mother and siblings all lost their
livelihoods, their homes and the ability to visit
him in prison where he remains, wrongfully convicted.
CRITICAL CASES
NEW ORLEANS, AFTER KATRINA
BY EMILY MAW
Director Of the Innocence Project New Orleans
I was in New Orleans on Monday and Tuesday.
There are not really words to describe the sadness
and devastation there.
Here is one particularly poignant example that
you may have read about in the news:
It is August 28, 2005. The U.S. army is guarding
the abandoned Orleans Parish criminal courthouse. It is dark, empty and damp inside. It was a
huge operation of 10 courtrooms and a magistrate
that sent more people than anywhere else in the
state up to Angola Prison for life without parole
and for which the queue for the entrance on Fridays –- drug court day – often extended down the
towering front steps and around the parking lot at
the side. The U.S. army guards don't question me
going inside and down to the basement where
most of the evidence and old records were kept.
They are all gone. The water line down there is
above my head and the stinking, still damp rooms
are full of filing cabinets that come up to my
shoulders stuffed with rotting pulp – records of
people's convictions. The evidence room is completely flooded and the door appears to still be
locked. I find filing cabinets of evidence like
gunshot residue tests strewn out in the parking lot
entrance: nobody attending to it and no one noticing me rifle through. Men in protective clothing
and masks are wheeling out wheelbarrows full of
bags of sodden, chaotic, papers. I ask them what
they are doing but none speak English. I am
eventually taken to their supervisor, a young man
who doesn't know what they are doing either. He
tells me they hadn't touched the evidence room
because there is so much biological material rotting that it is dangerous for his men to be there.
Four of our five Louisiana exonerations have
been convictions from that courthouse. When we
found the records that set Greg Bright and Earl
Truvia free after 27 years – evidence that showed
that the State knew that their only witness was
using a false name and was in a mental hospital
for the first scheduled trial date – they were in the
basement.
There is so much tragedy in everything that has
happened to our city and its people. This is but a
small snippet, but when I stood down there in the
middle of the damp, festering chaos and realized
that it was really gone, it felt enormous.
Of course we are picking up the pieces and carrying on and will try and hold someone accountable, but it is overwhelming.
CRITICAL CASES
JOHNNIE SAVORY: AN ILLINOIS TEENAGER 29 YEARS LATER . . .
Johnnie Lee Savory has been in prison since 1977
when, at the age of 14, he was convicted for the
murders of his 14-year-old friend James Robinson
Jr., and Robinson’s 19-year-old sister Connie
Cooper.
Mr. Savory was tried twice for these murders. His
first conviction in 1977 was reversed because of
heavy-handed police interrogation tactics, which
led to a confession being given involuntarily and
obtained in violation of the Miranda Rule. The
appellate court determined that the interrogation
of a 14-year-old for a period of a day-and-a-half
rendered the confession suspect.
Despite public statements by prosecutors that
there was not enough evidence to support a retrial, prosecutors elected to retry Mr. Savory in
1981 relying on the testimony of three witnesses
not called to testify in the original trial because
their testimony was viewed as not credible.
Based on this new testimony, and other physical
evidence, Mr. Savory was convicted after a 1981
retrial.
Johnnie Savory has consistently and persistently
denied any involvement in the stabbing deaths of
the two victims. The evidence of guilt has not
withstood the test of time. Two of the three witnesses presented against Mr. Savory at his 1981
trial have since recanted and the courts have questioned their reliability. DNA testing could provide a more definitive analysis of the physical
evidence available in 1977 but prosecutors have
vigorously opposed requests for testing, claiming
that the evidence is not relevant.
AIDWYC was approached in 2003 by Johnnie
Savory after he heard of our involvement in a California case.
AIDWYC reviewed Mr. Savory’s case and as a
result on April 15th 2004 wrote to Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich supporting Johnnie Savory’s
request for DNA testing and his petition for clemency. The clemency petition was filed in November 2003 with Governor Blagojevich.
No
response has been received as of this date from
the governor’s office.
On January 25, 1977, Johnnie Savory was on his
way to class when he was stopped by his school
principal and taken to the teachers’ lounge where
two detectives from the Peoria Police Department
asked him if he knew anything about the case.
Johnnie did not. However, the detectives persuaded him to accompany them to the police station where he was interrogated and asked to take a
polygraph test. Anxious to go home, Johnnie
agreed to take not only one but two polygraph
tests over the course of the next day-and-a-half,
each given by a different examiner. The second
examiner, Mr. Bowers, called Johnnie a liar and a
murderer as the tears rolled down his face. He
asked to speak to Officer Brown and he told her
“Okay, I did it.” Officer Brown asked him how
he did it and he replied, “I don’t know.” It was at
this point that the officer is said to have begun to
guide him as to which words to use. He agreed to
whatever she said. Then he said, “I’ve done what
you’ve asked of me, now can I go home because I
haven’t killed anyone.” His rights were read to
him and he was returned to the police station
where he was asked to give a signed statement.
He refused.
Prosecutors elected to try the 14-year-old as an
adult, an election accepted by the courts. In July
of 1977, the jury deliberated for about two hours
before returning a verdict of guilty. In August
1977, Johnnie Savory was sentenced to 50-100
years in prison.
The State’s evidence at Mr. Savory’s first trial primarily consisted of:
•
•
Mr. Savory’s confession, which was admitted over the objections of the defense.;
A pair of pants belonging to his father which
the State alleged contained a bloodstain with
the same blood type as one of the victims;
and
•
A three-inch pocketknife with possible blood
on it.
Johnnie Savory’s Defense presented evidence
indicating that he had nothing to do with the
crime:
•
Testimony from other individuals that Mr.
Savory was with them at the time of the
crime;
•
The absence of Mr. Savory’s fingerprints at
the crime scene; and
•
Evidence that hairs were found on both victims’ hands did not belong to Johnnie Savory
or to the victims.
In April of 1980, the Illinois Third District Appellate Court reversed the conviction ruling that the
confession was illegal because it was obtained in
violation of the Miranda Rule and was not voluntary. The case was reversed and remanded back
to the 10th Judicial Circuit of Peoria County. The
State’s attempt to appeal to the Illinois Supreme
Court and the United States Supreme Court were
rebuffed by those courts which refused to hear an
appeal.
Following the reversal, Michael Mihms, the
State’s Attorney of Peoria County in 1977, now a
judge on the United States District Court for the
Central District of Illinois, told the Peoria Star
that, “Without the confession, it’s impossible to
retry Johnnie Savory, so that’s it, he won’t be
retried.”
John Barra, State’s Attorney of Peoria County in
1981, was also quoted stating that: “Without the
confession, there is nothing to tie Johnnie Savory
to the crime, or the scene of the crime.”
Rather than dropping the case, however, the State
turned to three witnesses, Ella, Tina and Frankie
Ivy, and claimed Mr. Savory had made inculpatory admissions to each of them regarding the
deaths of the victims. According to an Assistant
State’s Attorney involved in the first trial, the
Ivy’s were not called to testify at the first trial
because they were not viewed as credible wit-
CRITICAL CASES
JOHNNIE SAVORY: AN ILLINOIS TEENAGER 29 YEARS LATER . . .
nesses. Indeed, police reports from interviews
conducted with the Ivy’s in 1977 do not reflect
any of the statements that Ivy’s claimed that Mr.
Savory made in their 1981 testimony. Such statements are not in fact reflected in police reports
until just weeks prior to the second trial. Additionally, in an interview taped by a private investigator just days before the trial, Frankie Ivy
denied that Mr. Savory made any inculpatory
statements at all. For some unexplained reason,
Mr. Savory’s attorney never presented this evidence to the jury.
The State’s evidence in the second trial consisted
of:
•
•
The bloodstained pants;
Hairs found at the crime scene, which were
allegedly “similar to Mr. Savory’s hair using
microscopic comparison”;
•
The Ivy’s testimony that Mr. Savory made
admissions about the murder;
•
The testimony of Robert F. Gonowski, criminologist, who testified that blood on the
pants matched the victim Connie Cooper’s
blood.
On May 1, 1981, after five hours of deliberation,
the jury returned a verdict of guilty. Mr. Savory
received a sentence of 40 to 80 years.
Post-trial proceedings
All Mr. Savory’s state and federal appeals were
denied. However, two of the Ivy’s recanted their
testimony soon after trial and have recently reaffirmed those recantations. Additionally, in one
post-conviction proceeding, Savory v. Lane, 832
F.2d 1011 (7th Cir. 1987) Id. at 1019, the United
States 7th Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Court Circuit found constitutional error at
Mr. Savory’s trial and noted that the Ivy’s were
not particularly persuasive witnesses stating that,
“The Ivy’s testimony had ‘less probative force’
than Illinois courts had ascribed to it. However,
the Court upheld the conviction only after finding
any constitutional error harmless because the
physical evidence presented against Mr. Savory
was, in the court’s words ‘damning’.”
After Illinois adopted a statute in 1997 providing
procedures for post-conviction DNA testing of
evidence, Mr. Savory sought to have this socalled “damning” physical evidence tested. The
tests conducted in 1977 could only determine that
the bloodstain on the pants was the same blood
type as the victim, and of Mr. Savory’s father who
claimed he was the source of the bloodstain.
Prosecutors sought to block testing claiming that
the physical evidence was not relevant to the conviction at all, instead claiming that the Ivy’s testimony was the basis for the conviction. That
position was accepted by Illinois Courts, including the Illinois Supreme Court.
Mr. Savory is currently pursuing several avenues
to win his freedom and establish his innocence.
sent the Governor letters in support of his petition
are Rubin Hurricane Carter; Kate Germond of
Centurion Ministries; Colin Starger, Staff Attorney with the Innocence Project at Cardozo School
of Law; Rob Warden, Centre for Wrongful Convictions and the Death Penalty; and the late Prentice H. Marshall, attorney and former U.S.
District Court Judge.
Mr. Savory is also pursuing DNA testing in Federal Court based on a theory that testing is mandated by the United States Constitution.
Finally, Mr. Savory continues to seek his parole
from the Illinois Prisoner Review Board. In
October 2005, Mr. Savory received seven of eight
votes required for parole. Mr. Savory is hopeful
that he will be able to receive the final vote at a
future hearing.
Johnnie Savory is a man of deep faith who
strongly believes that one day he will be exonerated and he will be free to help others who have
suffered at the hands of the justice system for
crimes they did not commit.
For further information on Mr. Savory’s case
please contact the AIDWYC office at 416-5047500.
As of November 2004, Mr. Savory has had a Petition for Executive Clemency pending before
Governor Blagojevich. The petition seeks clemency in light of the weak case against Mr. Savory,
and also asks Governor Blagojevich to order
DNA testing. Among the many people who have
THE COMPENSATION FILE
FAILURE IN COMPENSATING WRONGLY CONVICTED VICTIMS: THE SECOND INJUSTICE
BY CARLO TARINI
Mr. Tarini is a veteran public relations specialist
and lobbyist, who is working on behalf of Quebec's Michel Dumont and other victims to obtain
compensation and reforms in the compensation
system for the wrongfully convicted. He can be
reached at [email protected]
For the past 9 months it has been my mission and
pleasure to blast indifferent politicians in Quebec
and the rest of Canada over their inaction in compensating victims of wrongful convictions.
Although initially my focus was on Michel
Dumont’s case it changed when other cases came
to our attention. Michel and I formed a group we
appropriately named Injustice Quebec, which
would better enable us to ensure that these stories
maintained a high level of visibility in the media.
Now, four years later he is still waiting for compensation. But he has now become more vociferous, which has caught the attention of Quebec’s
politicians, particularly Justice Minister Yvon
Marcoux. After numerous public demonstrations
notably one in front of Quebec's National Assembly with a 40 foot billboard to promote the association's web site www.injusticequebec.ca, public
opinion has grown stronger and politicians are
finally starting to listen to Dumont concerning
compensation.
Another recent victim of a wrongful conviction,
Simon Marshall, has quite unexpectedly been
granted compensation.
Michel Dumont's case gets coverage
In 1990, a woman from Boisbriand, a town just
north of Montreal, was raped in her home. She
told the police that her bedspread was covered
with sperm. The police failed to pick up the bedspread and failed as well to lift fingerprints. The
woman could not identify Michel Dumont. She
claimed her attacker had tattoos on both forearms.
Michel Dumont does not have any tattoos. In
spite of his solid alibi and clean record, he was
convicted and sentenced to four years and four
months in prison.
Later, as Dumont's appeal was before the courts,
the sexual assault victim told the police and the
crown that she had identified the wrong person
and signed an affidavit to that effect. This information never made it to Dumont's lawyer or to
the judge looking into his appeal.
Dumont went to jail, where as a perceived sex
offender, he was severely beaten numerous times
by other inmates. His incarceration was from
beginning to end like living in hell.
Dumont was cleared in 2001, long after he had
served his full sentence.
challenged man, was wrongfully convicted of
sexual assaults and spent five years in prison.
DNA tests recently released by Quebec City
police proved that Marshall did not commit either
the series of sexual assaults that sent him to
prison in 1997, or the sexual assaults he admitted
to committing in 2003 after being released from
prison.
Injustice Quebec and Police Union officials representing Quebec City's local police have jointly
stated that a public inquiry is the only way to get
to the bottom of Simon Marshall’s arrest and
wrongful conviction in 1997.
As a compromise, Public Security Minister
Jacques Dupuis has ordered Quebec's police ethics commission to investigate the officers who
handled the original investigation of Marshall's
case.
The response from the Quebec City police brotherhood has been that the police are being unfairly
scapegoated. They have pointed out also that the
Quebec government seems to have forgotten the
roles of other participants in the case, such as
lawyers, judges, psychologists, psychiatrists and
parole officials.
Solange Tremblay, Michel Dumont, Joyce Milgaard and Carlo Tarini
Quebec rejects inquiry into Simon Marshall's
wrongful conviction
The Quebec provincial public security minister
has agreed to compensate Simon Marshall and his
family even though he had not yet gone through
the regular bureaucratic procedures to clear his
name. Such an occurrence has happened only
once in the last 17 years in the province of Quebec. However, the justice department is still
rejecting calls from Injustice Quebec and the
Quebec Police Federation for an independent
inquiry into why Simon Marshall, a mentally
Since then, Dupuis has promised an internal
investigation, which would examine how Crown
prosecutors handled the case.
Michel Dumont, Simon Marshall and others
know the shock and devastation of being declared
guilty of a crime they had nothing to do with.
“It’s like the sky falling down on your head”,
Michel Dumont once said to me. He also asked
me to use my expertise to speed up the slow
wheels of justice.
In the past nine months we have staged a series of
events aimed at taking the issue of compensation
off the back burner. We protested at Quebec Justice Minister Yvon Marcoux’s golf tournament.
Asking for a full public inquiry into why a half
dozen men, including Michel Dumont and Simon
Marshall—both of whom spent years in prison for
rapes they did not commit—were wrongfully
FAILURE IN COMPENSATING WRONGLY CONVICTED VICTIMS: THE SECOND INJUSTICE
convicted. Michel Dumont has stood with his
family next to a hired billboard truck parked in
front of Quebec's legislature to denounce government inaction and failure to compensate victims.
We protested outside the Quebec legislature,
demanding the government to pay Dumont for
the time he spent in jail and the hardship his family continues to endure. We have had the pleasure
of holding a press conference at Justice Minister
Irwin Cotler’s last place of gainful employment,
the McGill University Faculty of Law, a venue
that was offered to us because we had the good
fortune to get Joyce Milgaard to attend and speak.
I applaud Joyce and her son David for their
invaluable assistance. They have both given far
too much of their blood at the altar of the wrongfully convicted.
Simon Marshall and Michel Dumont's cases are
both similar in that in each case there was a
botched police investigation, a prosecutor who
did not ask the right questions, the police who did
not obtain the right details and DNA tests and fingerprint evidence that was overlooked. We want
the government to shed some light on how such
investigations are allowed to go so awry. Why
prosecuting attorneys are able to convict people
rather than making sure justice is served. How
some take it upon themselves to demolish these
people in order to increase their own batting averages.
The State of the Situation in Quebec
We also want better treatment for the wrongly
incarcerated, including compensation to be determined through an impartial process. At the
present time the wrongly convicted have to fight
it out through civil litigation. It’s a sham, a second injustice. They get out of jail with a bus
ticket and have to work 15-hour days to pay their
lawyer just to get some measure of justice.
In Quebec, Rejean Pépin remains the only person
ever to have been compensated by a long-standing special provincial program devised to deal
with the wrongfully convicted. “Even today I
feel aggression against the system because of the
way I was dealt with,” he says. “I lost a wife, a
house, I lost it all. I feel my rights were abused
and I feel for all other cases of judicial error.”
Pépin spent 16 years trying to right the wrong,
which included a failed civil lawsuit for one million dollars, leading him into bankruptcy. Eventually the Quebec Ombudsman suggested the
province accept responsibility. He was compensated with $188,000-half from the province, half
from the federal government-and asked not to
talk about his ordeal.
Due to the tremendous media coverage afforded
the Simon Marshall case, the provincial government also immediately named an independent
arbitrator, former Quebec Justice Michel Proulx
to decide what monetary compensation Marshall
should receive and will ask the Quebec Court of
Appeal to overturn his conviction. Could this
finally be a first crack in the stone wall?
We hope so, because as we all know only too
well, compassion really kicks in when the spotlight and television lights shine on politicians.
STEVEN CRAWFORD
PENNSYLVANIA
In October 2005 U.S. District Judge Yvette Kane
ruled that Steven Crawford, a man who spent 28
years in prison on a murder conviction obtained by
tainted evidence, can proceed with his suit against
five former state police commissioners who Crawford contends knew of corruption in the ranks of
the state police but did nothing to investigate or
stop it. This order comes more than a year after the
state attorney general’s office filed a motion to dismiss the complaint filed by Steven Crawford, who
was convicted three times of murdering his neighbour and best friend John Eddie Mitchell in 1970.
Kane also ruled that Dauphin County’s insurance
company, Coregis Insurance Co., must defend and
indemnify the county in the Crawford case.
Steven Crawford was released in June 2002 after
critical evidence in his case was found to have been
altered. His full story can be found in AIDWYC
Journal # 3.
GREGORY PARSONS
On September 1, 2005 Newfoundland’s Justice
Minister and Attorney General Tom Marshall
announced that the province of Newfoundland
would be awarding Gregory Parsons an additional
$650,000.00 in compensation.
“Following a careful review of statements made
during the Lamer Inquiry and concerns expressed
by Commissioner Lamer, I was concerned about
Mr. Parsons personal situation at the time he
agreed to the original compensation package,”
stated Minister Marshall. Commissioner Lamer
has advised that the evidence at the inquiry
revealed that Mr. Parsons was in such dire need
that he probably instructed counsel to accept a
compensation package that may not have been
adequate. “Although we had previously stated
that government would await Commissioner
Lamer’s report on the administration of justice
before addressing compensation concerns about
the case of Greg Parsons, there was no reason to
await the report– we have been provided with
insight on the Parsons matter, have listened to the
concerns expressed by Commissioner Lamer and
felt that we had enough information to revisit the
original package,” added Minister Marshall. “I
am confident that this is the right thing to do.
The total amount awarded to Mr. Parsons is $1.3
million.
Greg Parsons
was wrongfully
convicted
in
1994 of the
murder of his
mother, and was
subsequently
acquitted and
declared factually innocent.
inquiry that members of the Royal Newfoundland
Constabulary harassed him for years.
He was arrested twice, once with the use of a
police dog that bit him so severely he needed 38
stitches to the close the wounds.
With suspicion hanging over him. Parsons said
he was unable to find a job and eventually turned
to social services to feed his family.
Parsons was exonerated by DNA evidence. A
childhood friend has since confessed and is
spending life in prison.
Greg Parsons and his family are happy that everything is finally done and over with. His biggest
goal now is to live a private life with his family.
Parsons spent
six weeks in prison before he was released pending an appeal, but he testified before a judicial
CANADIAN UPDATES
ROBERT BALTOVICH
JIM DRISKELL
DAVID MILGAARD
On October 17, 2005
Robert Baltovich was
instructed by Judge Watt
to appear in court on
December 21st to proceed with a new trial.
AIDWYC lawyers James
Lockyer and Joanne
McLean are representing
him at trial.
Former chief justice of the Ontario
Superior
Court,
Patrick LeSage is to
oversee a judicial
inquiry into Jim
Driskell’s
1991
first-degree murder
conviction in the
death of friend,
Perry Harder. Federal Justice Minister Irwin
Cotler quashed Jim Driskell’s conviction and
ordered a new trial in March. Manitoba justice
officials announced soon after that they would
not retry Jim Driskell, stayed the charges and
ordered a public inquiry into his case.
The Milgaard Inquiry
began on January 17, 2005.
It was adjourned December
7th for six weeks. The
Inquiry will resume on January 16, 2006 when David
Milgaard’s
original
defence lawyer and two
Crown prosecutors who
opposed his appeal are to
testify. It is predicted that
the Inquiry will end in
April 2006.
David Milgaard recently married and will become
a first time father in February 2006. We offer
David and Christine our sincere congratulations
for a happy and fulfilling life together.
LAST MINUTE UPDATE
A hearing was held on a pretrial motion concerning
an alleged conflict of interest arising out of Mr.
Lockyer having rendered an opinion for Legal Aid
regarding the Bernardo matter. Arguments were
heard in front of Superior Court Judge David Watt
on December 15. Judge Watt reserved his decision
until January 27, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. Robert Baltovich will not have to appear in court on December
21st.
No date has been announced as to when the
inquiry will commence.
CANADIAN UPDATES
MILGAARD COMMISSIONER MISSES POINT
BY RON DALTON
On October 24, 2005 I
had the pleasure of participating in David Milgaard’s press conference
in Saskatoon. David
called the press conference to bring attention to
the lack of compensation
in my case and that of
Michael Dumont of Quebec. Given the location and timing of the press
conference David opened his remarks with the
statement he was not there to discuss his own
case or the ongoing public inquiry looking into
that matter. Naturally at the conclusion of his
statement the press asked him to comment on the
ongoing public inquiry. He briefly advised that he
wished the Commissioner well in the effort to
WILLIAM MULLINS-JOHNSON
find out what went wrong some thirty-five years
ago. He further explained how difficult it was for
him to revisit that nightmare and stated frankly
how far he had personally come in his recovery
since leaving prison in 1992.
Imagine my shock to learn a couple of days later
that the Commissioner had threatened to withdraw David’s standing at his own Inquiry over
the remarks he made. In explaining just how difficult it was for him to relive the ordeal David
noted it made him physically sick and that he did
not wish to attend the proceedings which his
mother attends faithfully as a family representative. When pressed on the possibility of being
subpoenaed David suggested to reporters that any
attempt to force his attendance would reflect
poorly on the work of the Inquiry.
Commissioner as an attempt to undermine the
work of the Inquiry and further as threat of public
ridicule. As a participant in the press conference I
can categorically state no such attempt was consciously or unconsciously made. In fact, both
David and his counsel made it abundantly clear
they support fully the aims of the Public Inquiry.
It is unfortunate the Commissioner missed the
real message in David’s remarks, even after
thirty-five years the miscarriage of justice he suffered continues to exact a heavy personal price. It
is a tribute to the indomitable spirit of David Milgaard that he chose to speak out in support of
myself, Mr. Dumont, and other victims. David
has earned the right to a private and peaceful life
far from the cruelty and insensitivity of judicial
proceedings and we all owe him that dignity.
Those candid revelations of the depth of his personal suffering appear to have been taken by the
LAMER INQUIRY
William Mullins-Johnson
was rushed to Sunnybrook
Hospital on December 12,
2005 where he was operated on for a pinched sciatic nerve that he had been
suffering with since the
end of October. Bill, being forever the optimist,
considers his hospitalization a good opportunity
to quit smoking.
November 24th Newfoundland’s Justice Minister
Tom Marshall granted Justice Lamer’s request
for a six-month extension to compile his report.
The cost of conducting the inquiry could total $7
million by the time the report has been submitted.
More than two thirds of the inquiry’s budget has
been used to pay Justice Lamer, a colleague, as
well as a long list of lawyers who have worked
on the inquiry.
JUSTICE ANTONIO LAMER
On June 11, 2005, the public inquiry into the
wrongful convictions of three Newfoundland
men – Ron Dalton, Randy Druken and Gregory
Parsons – completed its hearing into how the
criminal justice system in Newfoundland handled
these cases.
Ron Dalton is not pleased about the delay and
believes the money could have gone towards
compensating Randy Druken and him, and taking
corrective measures regarding the legal aid system, the police force or the justice system.
Commissioner Antonio Lamer was to have his
report submitted on December 31st. However, on
CANADIAN UPDATES
CONGRATULATIONS
JEROME KENNEDY
On December 9, 2005 the Law Society of Newfoundland & Labrador dropped a complaint they
had lodged against Jerome Kennedy whom they
had charged with professional misconduct in July
2003 for saying that unqualified judges are one of
the causes of wrongful conviction. His controversial speech was made at a convention of wildlife officers when trying to impress upon them
that they needed to conduct proper investigations
and have reasonable grounds for laying charges.
Chief Justice Derek Green of the trial division of
Newfoundland’s Supreme Court prompted the
complaint, saying that the comments made by
Jerome Kennedy could dent the public’s faith in
the impartiality of judges.
An adjudication panel began a hearing in January
2005, but was put on hold when one of the tribunal’s rulings was appealed through the court system.
Mr. Kennedy said he talked to the Chief Justice
and related to him that his earlier criticisms were
not of the court as a whole, but that he was merely
pointing out that there are several players behind
wrongful convictions, including individual
judges.
At the time, Mr. Kennedy was frustrated that a
public inquiry conducted by former federal Chief
Justice Antonio Lamer into three wrongful convictions in Newfoundland (those of Ron Dalton,
Gregory Parsons and Randy Druken) was not
going to look into the role of judges in the cases.
James Lockyer, who was to testify on Mr.
Kennedy’s behalf, said that Mr. Kennedy’s contention that trial judges can cause wrongful convictions was an “obvious fact” that should not be
taken as an insult. “Trial judges, like everybody
else, make mistakes,” he added.
JEROME KENNEDY APPOINTED
QUEEN’S COUNSEL
On June 8, 2005 Tom Marshall, Justice Minister
of Newfoundland and Labrador released the following statement to the media:
Tom Marshall, Justice Minister and Attorney
General, is pleased to announce that the Lieutenant-Governor in Council has appointed ten lawyers Queen’s Counsel, an honorary title
recognizing exceptional merit and contribution to
the legal profession in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Jerome Kennedy
“Every player in the system, from witness to
defence to Crown to police to judge, can all separately and independently be a cause of a wrongful
conviction.”
If the complaint had been upheld, Jerome
Kennedy could have faced a fine, suspension, or
even disbarment.
Jerome Kennedy was pleased that his comments
have created a healthy debate nationally on the
politics behind judicial appointments. A subcommittee of the House of Commons justice committee held hearings into the issue over the past few
months, and heard much stronger condemnation
of the appointments process than that voiced by
Mr. Kennedy.
It would have been a tragedy if a lawyer of Jerome Kennedy’s calibre, honesty and integrity had
been punished for speaking the truth.
AIDWYC is proud that Jerome Kennedy is one of
its directors and regional representative on the
east coast.
"It is a distinguished honor to be recognized as
Queen’s Counsel," stated Minister Marshall. "I
congratulate those appointed for their achievements in the legal profession in the province and
wish them continued success in the future."
Queen’s Counsel comprises senior barristers who
have served a minimum of ten years in the legal
profession, who have gained the respect of their
clients and peers and are within good standing
with the Bar. The appointments are made on the
recommendation of the Legal Appointments
Board and appointed by the Minister of Justice
and Attorney General.
Jerome Patrick Kennedy received a Bachelor of
Arts (Honours) from Memorial University and an
LL. B from the University of New Brunswick in
1984. He was admitted to the Bar in 1985 and is a
partner in Simmonds Kennedy. Mr. Kennedy is
Atlantic Director for the Association in Defence
of the Wrongfully Convicted.
We join Justice Minister Marshall in expressing
our sincere congratulations to Jerome Kennedy, a
finer and more determined seeker of truth you
will be hard pressed to find.
INTERNATIONAL CASE UPDATES
MAX SOFFAR
WILLIAM MAYO GEORGIA
Max
Soffar
was
removed from death
row in Texas when his
conviction was overturned for the second
time on April 21,
2004. On January 8,
2005
the
District
Attorney’s office announced they would be retrying Max Soffar on his original 1980 indictment.
Max Soffar is now housed in Houston county jail
awaiting jury selection, which will start on January 6, 2006. The judge who will be hearing his
case has tentatively scheduled the beginning of
the evidentiary phase of the trial for the first week
of February. Max Soffar is being represented by
Kathryn Kase and John Niland from the Texas
Defender Service, both of whom are wellrespected and experienced attorneys in death penalty cases.
In June 2005, William
Mayo appeared before
Judge Wallace Cato in
Calhoun County Court
in Calhoun, Georgia
expecting an opportunity to present evidence
proving
his
innocence. He was represented by counsel
Linda Sheffield of
Atlanta, Georgia. Ms. Sheffield and Mr. Mayo's
supporters had spent hundreds of hours preparing
for the hearing and were anticipating a thorough
review of the evidence in the case as well as an
opportunity to present evidence discovered since
the trial. Judge Cato stopped the proceedings
after hearing brief opening submissions from
counsel. He determined that the matter before
him was a “Successive Habeas Petition” and he
therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the matter
and the matter was concluded. Counsel for Mr.
Mayo argued, unsuccessfully, that the matter was
not a “Successive” Petition because new evidence
was now available.
Mr. Mayo is hoping to retain counsel to assist him
in the filing of a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus
seeking, in part, the laying of perjury charges
against State witnesses who testified against him
at trial but have since recanted. As well, and subject to funding, Judge Cato's decision may be
appealed. Mr. Mayo's supporters are attempting
to raise funds so that his matter can proceed further.
William Mayo is serving two life sentences for a
1991 robbery.
AIDWYC endorsed William Mayo’s case on September 8, 2003.
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
SOUNDS LIKE JUSTICE 3: AN EVENING TO REMEMBER
CONTRIBUTIONS BY
BRUCE MACDONALD, BILLY WINE
AND LISA WHYNOT
The funky Mod Club on College Street in Toronto
played host to the AIDWYC fundraising concert,
“Sounds Like Justice 3,” which took over a year
to plan. Everything from booking the venue and
scheduling the bands to organizing the silent auction and catering required months of planning and
lots of hard work on the part of the fundraising
committee including executive producer Lisa
Whynot, assistant producers Billy Wine & Win
Wahrer, graphic designers Les Cooper & James
Laforet, photographer Gilbert Benamou, committee members Kevin September, Madonna
McManus, Rachel Achtman, Linda Hogan, Carrie
Mann, Erin McLaughlin, Melanie Peters & Susan
Oppenheim and Cindi Shoot as well as numerous
other volunteers. Every detail was taken care of
well in advance except for one, the confirmation
of the guest of honour.
lins-Johnson, who was overwhelmed with the
show of support and love for him.
The audience was then treated to a concert that
showcased some of Canada’s brightest and best
talent. Musicians such as Andy Kim, Andy
Stochansky, Russell DeCarle, Bazil Donovan,
Danny Michel, Shaye, Kevin Fox, Les Cooper,
Nine Mile, Justin Rutledge, Blair Packham, Tom
and Bob Lanois were just some of those who performed, giving freely of their time and talent. All
the musicians were deeply moved by the events
of the evening and were passionate and committed about a cause some of them had just heard
about a short time before from entertainment lawyer Lisa Whynot. The concert was hosted by
television personality Krista Sutton and radio personality Jowi Taylor both of whom did a magnificent job.
Lisa Whynot said, “William Mullins-Johnson’s
presence gave a face to an organization which
many in attendance were just learning of. For the
rest of us, his presence was both a beautiful victory and a sad reminder of the countless injustices
that necessitate the tireless work of AIDWYC and
its volunteers.”
The Mod Club’s promoter and owner inspired and
deeply moved by the evening waved the club’s
fee and offered to help AIDWYC in the future.
Russell DeCarle took time to pose for a photo
with William Mullins-Johnson and committed, as
did Shaye and many of the other musicians, to
helping AIDWYC further their cause whenever
called upon.
The evening was a great success and helped
AIDWYC raise money and awareness for the
cause of the wrongly convicted.
The guest of honour, however, was not to be confirmed until the morning of the event. September
21st William Mullins-Johnson stepped out of a
Toronto courthouse. He was now a free man and
within a 12-hour period he would go from the
confines of a cell to a concert hall filled with
media and well-wishers, including other wrongly
convicted persons. His release turned the fundraiser into a celebration. His words turned the
night into a lesson in hope, love and strength.
Initial planning is now underway for next year’s
event. Help in planning, securing sponsors and
silent auction items and selling tickets will be
needed and greatly appreciated. It is our hope that
next year the Mod Club will be filled to overflowing in support of Canada’s wrongly convicted.
In the words of Billy Wine, “Let’s strive to make
next year’s concert a sell out. As far as ensuring
another guest of honour as deserving as William,
we can only hope and pray.”
The evening was truly remarkable. It kicked off
with a press conference including William Mullins-Johnson, his mother Laureena Hill and
AIDWYC lawyers James Lockyer and David
Bayliss.
A VIP reception and silent auction hosted by Jian
Ghomeshi followed. VIP guests Vern Harper,
Sam George, Clayton Ruby, and AIDWYC’s
James Lockyer, Ron Dalton and Win Wahrer all
delivered inspiring speeches regarding William
Mullins-Johnson’s case and the important and
vital work of AIDWYC. But the person who
stole the spotlight that evening was William Mul-
evening Andy Stochansky sang the benefit’s signature song, which William Mullins-Johnson
began to dance to with Win Wahrer. Overcome
with emotion, he stopped dancing and whispered
to Win, “I can’t believe this is being done for
me.”
PHOTOGRAPH BY GILBERT BENAMOU
One of the evening’s most moving moments
encapsulates why AIDWYC is so passionate
about the work it does. Near the end of the
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
AIDWYC’S AGM
BY JULIEN LEBOURDAIS
The 2005 AIDWYC
Annual General Meeting held in Toronto on
November 26 was more
than a business meeting
and more than a chance
to socialize with friends.
It gave us reason to rededicate ourselves to the
cause of the wrongly
convicted.
Co–president Mel Green
chaired most of the meeting – likely one of his
last official acts since he was appointed to the
Ontario bench a week later. The other co-president, Paul Copeland, also addressed the gathering. After the official business matters had been
dealt with, James Lockyer gave an overview of
the status of the many cases AIDWYC is currently handling across the country.
Tribute was paid to the late Diane Martin who
tragically passed away this past year. An
Osgoode Hall law professor, Diane had long
championed the cause of the wrongly convicted.
Attending the meeting were AIDWYC clients
Chris Bates, Romeo Phillion, Robert Baltovich,
Jeff Smith, William Mullins-Johnson and Juan
Melendez who spent almost 18 years on death
row in Florida. It is chilling to consider that
together these men spent almost 100 years in
prison for crimes they did not commit.
William Mullins-Johnson was released on bail
just two months ago. He is in the unique position
of having been convicted not only of a crime he
did not commit but in reality of a crime no one
committed. In an emotional speech, Bill told us
about his thoughts today and his feelings while he
was in prison. Most of us will never really know
what that’s like. For me, hearing from someone
who has been wrongfully convicted says it all.
Juan Melendez, was warmly welcomed as
AIDWYC’s spokesperson on U.S. cases. He
attended the meeting with Judi Caruso, lawyer,
friend, and co-founder of his project Voices
United for Justice. Juan eloquently spoke of his
18 years on death row and his continuing campaign against the death penalty. Juan has spoken
extensively across Canada, the U.S.A. and in
Europe. Capital punishment hasn’t been as big an
issue in Canada for some time but it is another
matter altogether in the U.S. Juan was the 24th
innocent person released from death row in the
state of Florida and the 99th in the U.S.
Reference was made on several occasions to Win
Wahrer’s birthday. A couple of presentations
were made to her followed by an impromptu
singing of “Happy Birthday”. After Mel introduced Win as “the soul of AIDWYC”, she
showed us all why by giving a very powerful plea
for us all to work harder, as well as to strive to
bring new members and volunteers into the Association. If more Canadians were as outraged at
wrongful convictions as Win is, we might have
fewer wrongly convicted people in this country.
After the meeting, Win’s daughter Jennifer
treated us to a sumptuous lunch complete with
birthday cake.
On behalf of AIDWYC Win Wahrer presented
Juan Roberto Melendez with a clock created
by AIDWYC client Jeff Boppre who is incarcerated in a Nebraska prison.
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
ONE THOUSAND
BY JUAN MELENDEZ
"No government is ever pure or wise enough to
claim the power to kill"
-Albert Camus
She always told me to have faith in God, to put
my trust in Him and one day I would be released.
But at the same time, as I learned after my
release, she was saving up money so that she
could bring my body back to Puerto Rico.
Although I hoped and prayed that it would never
happen, unfortunately, on December 2, 2005 in
the early hours of the morning when most of us
were sleeping, we executed the one-thousandth
person in the United States, since reinstatement
of the death penalty in 1976.
This shameful moment in our nation’s history is a
time to reflect on the death penalty and the terrible suffering and damage that it inflicts on so
many people: murder victims’ families, families
of the executed or those awaiting execution,
jurors, judges, lawyers, prison wardens, executioners, governors, death row inmates and many
others.
As a death row exoneree who spent seventeen
years, eight months and one day on Florida’s
death row for a crime I did not commit, I know
that the families of a person condemned to death
suffer terribly. I think my dear mother suffered
more than I did. Every single day of my incarceration on death row, she was on her knees praying
for a miracle that would prove my innocence.
many of those cases, innocence was discovered
by sheer luck, just like in mine. I wonder how
many others, how many of those who have
already been executed in this country, were not so
lucky? We can be sure that there were some and
we can be sure that as long as we continue to
have a death penalty, we will continue to execute
innocent people.
When we give power to our government to take
away human life, we should require nothing less
than perfection. The death penalty is a system
which will always be subject to human error. It
will never be perfect and should never be
allowed in our country or in any other part of the
world.
Photo By Gilbert Benamou
Thankfully, in my case, the miracle happened and
I was able to prove my innocence. But it took a
very long time. It didn’t happen until after the
Florida Supreme Court had already upheld my
case three times on appeal and it didn’t happen
until some very critical evidence was discovered,
sixteen years after I had been sentenced to death.
Right now, 122 people have been exonerated
from death rows throughout the country and in
It is time for us to unite against the death penalty:
a punishment that causes so much suffering and
so much pain; a punishment that we can never
apply fairly; and a punishment that can never be
reversed when we get it wrong.
If you are interested in working against the death
penalty, please visit www.nmrepeal.org for information about how you can become involved.
For more information about Juan Melendez and
his
work
for
justice,
please
visit
www.voicesunited4justice.com
CANADA’S OFFICIAL POSITION ON THE DEATH PENALTY
Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew and
Justice Minister Irwin Cotler on November 25,
2005 announced Canada's accession to a UN
treaty that confirms its continued opposition to
the death penalty.
"Becoming a party to the treaty is part of Canada's effort to send a clear message on this important human rights issue," said Minister Pettigrew.
"Canada opposes the death penalty and we support the international trend toward its abolition.
We urge all states that retain the death penalty to
abolish it or to impose a moratorium on its use,
and to become parties to the Second Optional
Protocol."
"Canada has been abolitionist in practice for
decades - no one has been executed in Canada
since 1962," said Minister Cotler. "By acceding
to the UN treaty, we not only formalize our long
standing support for the abolition of the death
penalty, but take our place at the forefront of the
international struggle toward abolition."
On December 13, 2005 Stanley 'Tookie' Williams was executed by the state of California.
Mr. Williams became the 1003rd person to be
murdered by the United States since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976. It
took the state of California 36 minutes to kill
Mr. Williams who had been on death row for
24 years.
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MELVYN GREEN
BY PETER MEIER
•
•
•
•
Guy Paul Morin Inquiry
Sophonow Inquiry
Lamer Inquiry
Brief to the Minister of Justice on changes to
S.690 of the Criminal Code
•
member of AIDWYC delegation to Ottawa
to meet with the Minister of Justice to discuss amendments to s.690.
•
Binaris appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada
In January 2004 Justice Green was elected CoPresident of AIDWYC with Paul Copeland. He
worked hard along with Paul to bring AIDWYC’s
organization into line with its growing profile and
demonstrated his capacity for leadership. Needless to say Justice Green will be greatly missed
by AIDWYC.
Due to his recent appointment as a Judge of the
Ontario Court of Justice, Mel Green has tendered
his resignation as a Director and Co-President of
AIDWYC.
Justice Green first became involved in AIDWYC
in 1998 when he joined AIDWYC’s Board as a
Director. At that time he represented AIDWYC
at the Guy Paul Morin Inquiry. From the start of
his involvement with AIDWYC Justice Green
played a leadership role, regularly attending
Board meetings and giving the Board the benefit
of his wisdom and experience. He speaks softly,
so that people listen attentively. He seems to
have followed the advice of Theodore Roosevelt,
to speak softly and carry a big stick.
Justice Green is also an expert legal draftsman.
He drafted lengthy, elegant affidavits in support
of applications for standing at Public Inquiries
and before the Supreme Court of Canada. When
standing was granted, he appeared as AIDWYC’s
counsel and provided the organization with thoroughly professional representation. Many important letters sent out by AIDWYC were either
drafted by Justice Green or run by him for comment.
Justice Mel Green
Although, prior to his recent appointment, Justice
Green was a busy, successful criminal counsel he
always made himself available for consultation
and for carrying out AIDWYC work undertaken
by him.
All of us at AIDWYC who had anything to do
with Justice Green recognize that he has the qualities that will make him an excellent judge.
The people of Ontario will be well served by his
taking a position on the Provincial Bench, and we
wish him well in his new career.
Among the tasks undertaken by Justice Green
(either alone or with others) on AIDWYC’s
behalf are the following:
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
HUMBERVIEW HIGHSCHOOL’S LAW SYMPOSIUM: A TREMENDOUS SUCCESS
BY MARLENE TRUSCOTT
tional, well-organized, polite teenagers. Each
guest was greeted outside, then once inside a student was assigned to each group for the entire
symposium. It was great having someone so
polite and helpful to take us from room to room.
Friday, November 25th was a very special day for
Steve, Ryan and me, as we attended a Law Symposium at Humberview Secondary School in Bolton, Ontario. George Allain and his law students
sponsored the symposium with a full agenda
from 8:15 to 3:00 p.m.
All guest speakers were given a thank you basket
to take home containing a special note from the
students.
The "kick-off" assembly commenced with a welcome from Mrs. Patricia MacDonald, Principal of
Humberview, followed by Mrs. Arnold-Judge,
Trustee of Caledon Peel District School Board
and Madam Justice N. Kastner, Ontario Court
Justice. The goals for the symposium were
brought forward by George Allain, following
which our son, Ryan Truscott, gave a short welcoming speech on behalf of our family. Senator
Marjorie LeBreton then spoke to the crowd of
700 students.
Following this agenda, both students and workshop guest speakers went to their designated
rooms for two different sessions. Among the
guest speakers in the workshops were persons
from various walks of life in the Justice system Judges, Inspectors of police forces, Professor
from Osgoode Hall, media representatives, a senator, Mark Green of the Dept. of Justice, students,
the Chief Coroner of Ontario, Win Wahrer, the
Director of Client Services, along with two of
AIDWYC's other clients, Chris Bates and William Mullins-Johnson, detectives from York
Regional Police, Isabel LeBourdais' son Julien
LeBourdais, private detectives and a padre and
retired Member of the Parole Board, a former
guard of a Juvenile Facility, Steve, Ryan and me.
Linden MacIntyre of Fifth Estate then spoke to
the students and guests and showed his 50-minute
documentary on Steven's case, after which he
answered questions from the auditorium.
The final presentation to the students, staff and
honored guests, was the Steven Truscott presentation which opened with Phil Campbell, one of
our AIDWYC lawyers, followed by Mac Stienburg (retired prison chaplain) and then Steve.
All in all this was a day we will never, ever forget
and we thank all of Humberview and the guest
speakers who helped to make this special day,
even more than “special”. George Allain and his
students did a marvellous job and Steve and I
would appreciate any one of you, who wish to do
so, to send him and his students an encouraging
email ([email protected]).
Steven Truscott addressing students
In the middle of Steve's lengthy speech, Ryan and
I joined him in paying tribute to those who have
helped us over the past 45 years. The people
brought on stage for this tribute were Julien LeBourdais, Brian King - detective, Win Wahrer AIDWYC, Les Horne - guard at Hillcrest Training School, Guelph in l960, Mac Steinburg padre and Parole Board Member, George Allain teacher from Humberview, Phil Campbell defence lawyer, and Jeff & Mary Yanchus teachers from John F. Ross High School in
Guelph. In their absence, tributes were presented
to Linden MacIntyre of Fifth Estate, Julian Sher author the book "Until You Are Dead" and Rob
MacKay of River Run Centre in Guelph, who
presented the play "Steven" for 22 performances,
nine of which were matinee performances for
high school students.
We had our farewells, autographs and pictures
following the finale. The students were very
receptive and were full of many, many questions.
Our family would sincerely like to thank George
Allain and the students at Humberview who spent
months pulling together this successful symposium. The students of Humberview were excep-
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
GEORGE ALLAIN: A MAN OF VISION
BY WIN WAHRER
In 2004 George Allain and his Humberview Secondary School law class designed and engineered a website devoted to the Steven Truscott
case. In 2005 George Allain’s law class studied
the case of Christopher Bates, a young man convicted in Quebec of a murder he did not commit.
But Mr. Allain does not confine his concern for
those wrongly convicted to the classroom. In
2005, Mr. Allain contacted Win Wahrer of
AIDWYC and shared his vision of Humberview
hosting a one day Law Symposium for high
school students from across Ontario and asked
whether she would be interested in participating
and advising him whom to invite from the
wrongly convicted community, media, lawyers
and others. Win Wahrer was eager to help with
what she considered to be a wonderful opportu-
nity for the wrongly convicted to educate students
and answer questions about their cases, the causes
and effects of being wrongly convicted.
AIDWYC and the wrongly convicted are
indebted to George Allain and his students for
taking such a worthwhile vision and making it
into a reality. Despite some negative response
they remained committed to their ambitious plan
to share the plight of the wrongly convicted with
high schools throughout Ontario.
The Law Symposium was a huge success attracting 700 law students from as far away as Sudbury, Ontario.
Steven, Marlene and Ryan
Truscott participated in two workshops. Win
Wahrer conducted two workshops with William
Mullins-Johnson and Chris Bates, as well as private investigator Sean Gladney who contributed
countless unpaid hours to the investigation of
both these cases.
George Allain well deserves the deep respect,
gratitude and admiration of AIDWYC and its current and potential clients for his unwavering
determination to educate students, teachers and
parents alike about the wrongly convicted and the
changes that must occur in the Criminal Justice
System in order that innocent people stop being
convicted and spending irreplaceable years in
prison for crimes they did not commit.
Also this past year, George Allain was able to
convince Humberview Secondary School to
sponsor the successful Steven Truscott “JUSTICE NOW!” bracelet fundraising campaign.
(You will find information about obtaining JUSTICE NOW! Bracelets below.)
JUSTICE NOW!
The AIDWYC Message Bracelet is now available in Support of Steven Truscott.
The white silicone rubber bracelet is embossed
with the words JUSTICE NOW! Included is a
Steven Truscott information postcard.
And the cost is only $5.00 CAD each.
You may purchase JUSTICE NOW! bracelets
by contacting the AIDWYC office, indicating the
number of JUSTICE NOW! bracelets you
would like to order, your method of payment and
your shipping address.
Proceeds from the sale of the JUSTICE NOW!
bracelets help make AIDWYC’s work possible.
Please consider purchasing JUSTICE NOW!
bracelets for yourself, your family and friends.
They make a meaningful gift that anyone would
be proud to wear.
Thank you for your interest and support.
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
JEROME SHARES WORDS OF EXPERIENCE AND WISDOM WITH LAW STUDENTS
BY JEROME KENNEDY
I have always followed
with interest (through
Win and Marlene’s
emails) the efforts of the
Humberview students
on behalf of Steven
Truscott. The outstanding efforts of all
involved,
especially
George Allain and his
students, culminated in
a very successful symposium held on Friday,
November 25, 2005.
I am touched by the fact that people as young as
you care so much. No matter what transpires in
your lives in the future always remain true to your
desire to see that justice and fairness prevails.
By way of introduction, I am a criminal defense
lawyer in St. John’s, Newfoundland and I am the
Atlantic Canada representative on the AIDWYC
Board. I am counsel for 2 of the 3 men (Gregory
Parsons and Ronald Dalton) who were the subjects of a wrongful conviction inquiry recently
held in St. John’s and presided over by the former
Chief Justice of Canada, Antonio Lamer. We are
anxiously awaiting Commissioner Lamer’s
report, which we will be forthcoming in the New
Year. I am also currently reviewing AIDWYC
cases in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Quebec.
The message I want to pass on to you today is one
that is eloquently simple yet easily forgotten.
Wrongful convictions are about people and the
devastating effect that these miscarriages of justice have on people’s lives. Extraordinary people
like Steven and Marlene Truscott, despite every
reason to be angry and hateful, instead use their
experiences to help others in similar situations.
By raising awareness of wrongful convictions we
are dispelling the myth that these things only happen to “criminals”. The reality is that life’s
unpredictably can result in any of us being in the
wrong place at the wrong time. Society owes it to
the wrongly convicted to acknowledge innocence
and to say I am sorry. Unfortunately, justice officials oftentimes cannot find it in themselves to
accept responsibility for the roles they have
played in these tragedies. We have to look no further than the positions taken by justice officials in
the Lamer and Milgaard Inquiries.
To illustrate my point about the human tragedy
(and triumph) involved in wrongful convictions I
will discuss briefly two Newfoundland cases –
Gregory Parsons and Ronald Dalton.
Gregory Parsons was 19 years old when he was
charged in 1991 with the brutal murder of his
mother. Greg was convicted based on the hearsay
evidence of 40 Crown witnesses. My law partner,
Bob Simmonds, represented Greg at his five
month trial and I took over Greg’s case on the day
he was sentenced to life imprisonment on February 15, 1994. At that time I was only 34-yearsold but I knew intuitively that Greg was innocent,
not simply that there was not enough evidence.
Within a month Greg was released on bail pending appeal and his appeal was ultimately successful and a new trial ordered on December 6, 1996.
While I was preparing for Greg’s new trial in
1998, DNA established that an unknown male
was the real killer. Excellent police work resulted
in the arrest in June 2000 and subsequent conviction of the murderer, Greg’s childhood friend,
Brian Doyle. Throughout his ordeal Greg tried to
live a normal life and while waiting his second
trial got married. Today Greg is the father of two
young children and works full-time as a firefighter in the St. John’s fire department. Greg’s
compensation was finally completed after the
Lamer Inquiry and today Greg lives a “normal”
life.
In 1989 Ronald Dalton was a 31-year-old bank
manager in central Newfoundland. He was happily married with three young children (between
the ages of 18 months and 7 years) when his wife
died on August 15, 1988. Based on the opinion of
an inexperienced and unqualified forensic pathologist Ron Dalton was arrested on August 17,
1988 and charged with murdering his wife by
strangling her to death. On December 15, 1989
Ron was convicted by a jury and sentenced to life
in prison. He spent 8 ½ years in jail before I
became involved in his case in April 1997. At
that time I had a two-year-old daughter and my
wife was pregnant with our second child. I can
remember vividly being struck by the fact that my
daughter was only a little younger than Ron’s
youngest child when he went to jail. The thought
of ever being taken away from my daughter was
overwhelming and brought home to me the tragedy of Ron’s case. Ron’s appeal was ultimately
successful and, in an attempt to prove Ron’s innocence, I gathered opinions from 10 forensic
pathologists around the world who said that Ron’s
wife accidentally choked to death on food, as Ron
had always maintained. Despite providing these
opinions to the Crown prior to trial they still went
to trial. On June 24, 2000 a jury acquitted Ron
Dalton. The next day he went to his daughter’s
Grade 12 graduation in Prince Edward Island.
She had been in Kindergarten when Ron went to
jail. To this day the Newfoundland government
refuses to accept Ron Dalton’s innocence and this
terrible miscarriage of justice is perpetuated.
I review these cases to reinforce my basic point wrongful conviction work is not simply an intellectual or academic exercise, it is about people.
People like Steven Truscott, Gregory Parsons and
Ronald Dalton find the inner fortitude and courage to not only survive but to live normal lives.
To a certain extent they are “lucky” (if that term
can ever be used to describe these men) - they
have family, friends and supporters who love and
believe in them. Others are not so “lucky”. They
either leave jail unable to cope with life or, even
worse, they remain in jail despite their protestations of innocence. Despite our best efforts there
are people who are innocent but who will remain
in jail forever because we cannot prove their
innocence. This is a true tragedy. We owe it to
them to do our best.
AIDWYC ON THE MOVE
CONTACTS
JEROME SHARES EXPERIENCE
AND WISDOM
On a more positive note cries of innocence are no
longer ignored and in Canada we have come a
long way. But, as I said in a recent speech to a
room full of policemen and Crown attorneys in
Saint John, New Brunswick, let’s not get too selfcongratulatory because justice officers are preparing reports and holding wrongful conviction conferences. Justice officials cannot be allowed to
cleanse their consciences so easily. Not one case
of wrongful conviction in Canada has been identified solely as a result of the actions of the Crown
or police. AIDWYC is not only about preventing
wrongful convictions; we are about identifying
and rectifying the same.
Having said all of that I still have to be positive.
We have made great strides. But there is a lot of
work to be done.
However, the symposium held at your school
means so much to me. You have no hidden
agenda and you are involved because you care.
We can ask no more. Finally, one of the highlights of my career occurred during our AIDWYC
Conference that was held in St. John’s in June
2005. We had a party at my house after the conference where my two children (Julia, 10 and
Michael, 8) had the privilege to meet Steve Truscott, David Milgaard, Ronald Dalton and Gregory
Parsons, among others. To see these men socializing with the Deputy Chief of Police, Bob
Johnson, retired Court of Appeal Justice William
Marshall, and the Deputy Attorney General of
Manitoba, Bruce MacFarlane, confirmed my
hope for the future. To see all of us in the same
room bodes well. What each of you is doing,
through your involvement and simply by caring,
is helping to keep the hope alive that some day we
will be able to prevent the conviction of the innocent. Thank you so much for your efforts.
Centurion Ministries
Southern Center for Human Rights
221 Witherspoon St,
83 Poplar Street, NW
Princeton, NJ 08542, USA
Atlanta, GA 30303, USA
www.centurionministries.org
www.schr.org
The Innocence Project (DNA only)
Department of Justice Canada
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/
55 Fifth Avenue, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10003-4391, USA
Section 690 application procedure can be found
in “Publications”.
www.innocenceproject.org
Criminal Cases Review Commission
Truth in Justice
Alpha Tower, Suffolk Street Queensway,
http://truthinjustice.org
Birmingham, B1 1TT, UK
Includes list of U.S. and international innocence
projects.
www.ccrc.gov.uk
Innocent
www.talkleft.com/injustices.html
533 32nd St
Grand Rapids, MI 49548, USA
Voices United4Justice Project
(Juan Melendez)
http://aboutinnocent.org
www.voicesunited4justice.com
Talk Left
Justice Denied Magazine
PO Box 23255
Pleasant Hill, CA. 9523, USA
www.justicedenied.org
CONGRATULATIONS
RUBIN HURRICANE CARTER AND JAMES LOCKYER
AWARDED HONOURARY
DOCTORATES
On October 14, 2005 Rubin
Hurricane Carter was presented
with an Honourary Doctorate of
Laws from York University.
The degree was bestowed upon
Dr. Carter in appreciation of his
lifelong battle for innocence and
justice.
Dr. Carter reminded the audience that there is a new generation of people being wrongfully
convicted and that the fight for a
fair justice system is far from
over. There is no greater good
than the saving of an innocent
life.
“The light shines in the darkness but the darkness will not overcome”
James Locker and George D. Hunter
This is the second such honour conferred upon Dr. Rubin Hurricane Carter. The
first was given to him by Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia in October 2003.
James Lockyer received an honorary doctorate of law degree on July 18,
2005 from the Law Society of Upper Canada during the Call to the Bar
ceremony at the Convention Centre in London, Ontario.
When asked if he ever felt hopeless while in jail, he remarked with a smile, “I
never lost hope. I had to dare to dream. I had to act like I was already free while I
was locked down in prison. I knew I would be free. And it’s been twenty years
next month that I have been free. So dare to dream.”
Law Society Treasurer George D. Hunter presented the Doctor of Laws
Degree to James in recognition of his numerous contributions in the
field of criminal law and in defence of those wrongly convicted.
Congratulations on a well deserved award and twenty years of freedom.
PHOTO OF RUBIN CARTER TAKEN BY JOYCE WONG
MARLYS EDWARDH
On November 4, 2005
AIDWYC
director
and prominent criminal lawyer Marlys
Edwardh received a
special award from
Canadian Journalists
for Free Expression
(CJFE) for her work
in defending the right
to freedom of expression, including the defence of Canadian reporters.
“Journalism is one of the few professions that
requires personal courage," noted Ms. Edwardh.
In congratulating James, Mr. Hunter stated: “Mr. Lockyer has dedicated
an extraordinary amount of time and effort to preserving and promoting
the fair administration of justice. His invaluable contribution to
Ontario’s criminal bar has been accomplished with the character and
integrity to which the legal profession aspires. He is a credit to the profession and a role model for today’s graduates.”
Guy Paul Morin and Joyce Milgaard were in attendance.
LAST MINUTE UPDATE
BILL MULLINS-JOHNSON
On December 15, 2005 Saskatoon health officials voted against giving Dr. Charles Smith,
former pathologist for Sick Children's Hospital, full privileges to work out a one year,
$230,00.00 contact. A job that had been arranged for him by a medical school classmate.
The chairperson of the Saskatoon Health Region explained after the vote that the members
were concerned about public confidence in the health system and felt it was wise to wait until
the probe of suspicious child death cases were completed in Ontario.
The effect of the decision is that Dr. Charles Smith can no longer perform the work he was
contracted to perform because he no longer has requisite hospital privileges.
THANK YOU
AIDWYC is deeply grateful for the generous
financial contributions of the following organizations:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Anonymous Donor
Criminal Lawyers’ Association (CLA)
Humberview Secondary School (Bolton,
Ontario)
Law Foundation of Ontario
River Run Centre (Guelph, Ontario)
Trillium Foundation
McNally Robinson Booksellers
WILLIAM MULLINS-JOHNSON’S FIRST FEW MONTHS OF FREEDOM
BY HAROLD LEVY
During his first few months of freedom, after
more than a dozen years behind bars as a convicted child killer, Bill Mullins-Johnson has
begun to put his life together again and it has not
always been an easy task.
On Wednesday Sept. 20 he was inmate 580824C
at Warkworth penitentiary where he had spent
almost thirteen years locked up in his cell most of
the day for the first-degree murder of his 4-year
old niece Valin.
The very next day he was freed on bail pending a
review by federal justice minister Irwin Cotler,
after a prosecutor told court there likely had been
a miscarriage of justice in his case.
In other years Mullins-Johnson would get a card
or a money order from his mother, but he
wouldn’t celebrate birthdays or holidays inside
the prison walls because it was “too depressing.”
“Another birthday in jail. Another Christmas in
jail. Another Easter in jail,” he said.
Another memorable experience was walking up
to Warkworth’s main gate on Monday and asking
the guards if he could be admitted into the prison
so he could pick up his possessions - just enough
to fill two metal foot lockers - a television set
which burnt out in 2001, and $105.12 cash. “First
they had to let me out,” he said. “Now they had
to let me back.”
Valin had been found dead in her bed in her Sault
Ste. Marie family home on June 27, 1993. Two
independent pathologists had reviewed forensic
materials from Valin’s autopsy and had concluded
that Valin had not been murdered at all as a
pathologist and medical practitioners had concluded at the time - she had died a natural death.
Mullins-Johnson told Toronto Star reporter
Harold Levy, who has accompanied him much of
the time since his release, that he has enjoyed
experiences such as attending a Blue Jay’s game,
dropping by the Hard Rock Café (he learned to
play guitar in prison), and taking a stroll through
the massive Toronto Star newsroom where he had
hoped to meet one of his heroes, sports writer
Damien Cox. “I read him all the time in jail,” he
said at the time.
He has also enjoyed dining at restaurants like
Ruth’s Chris Steak House on the day of his
release, where the staff had printed out a special
“freedom lunch” menu for the occasion.
But nothing had touched him as much as a surprise birthday party at his aunt’s house - he had
turned thirty-five a few weeks prior - his first
birthday celebration in all these years.
“It really moved me,” he said, noting that the
clothing his relatives gave him as gifts was the
ideal present for some one who had been locked
up in jail for so many years.
Bill with his mother Laureena
All went smoothly until he dropped by the administration building and was told they couldn’t give
him his savings until he produced his prison card
to identify himself.
Twelve and a half years and they still don’t know
who he is,” his mother, Laureena Hill, who had
gone along for the trip, said in disgust. “He is
6’5” tall. His picture has appeared on television
screens all over Canada in the last two weeks,”
said AIDWYC’s Win Wahrer who had also come
along for the trip. “He’s the most famous former
inmate in Canada right now and they need formal
I.D.?”
“Thank you very much, I’m sorry for the inconvenience,” Mullins-Johnson said politely to the
clerk when the matter was finally resolved, and
got back into the station wagon for the trip back
to Toronto.
As the car drove away from the penitentiary, Mullins-Johnson looked back only once, at the place
where a “teepee” used for native programs and
ceremonies used to stand.
“That was the centre of our spiritual life,” the
native Ojibway said, adding that he didn’t look at
anything else as Warkworth faded into the distance, “because nothing else mattered to me.”
Mullins-Johnson does however have memories of
prison life which can’t be so easily be set aside like long stretches in solitary confinement cells at
his own request and the spectre of his cell being
torn apart during routine searches for contraband.
But Mullins-Johnson says he conditioned himself
not to get upset “because it’s not my home.”
“They can go ahead because I have nothing to
hide,” he continued. “They can do whatever they
want in their house.
In the rear of the station wagon was the sum total
of the personal property Mullins-Johnson had
accumulated in the penitentiary after more than a
dozen years, including copies of the grievances
he had filed with the administration for cutting
out native programs, a text book on criminal court
procedure, and some country “tapes” by Doc
Watson and (Kix) Brooks and Ronnie Dunn, that
helped him get through some of the tougher
moments.
Mullins-Johnson also liberated the books of
music he had learned to play on his guitar while
in prison such as a couple of the Eagle’ tunes
(Take it Easy and Witchy Woman) and some of
his Creedence Clearwater favourites. He left the
rest of his property behind bars with friends.
“As far as I’m concerned I can’t hold on to anything in the past,” he said. “If I didn’t need it, it
didn’t come out of the prison with me.”
Back in Toronto, Mullins-Johnson soon found
that he was rapidly evolving from an anonymous
number to a human being in the eyes of other people. One day, after he had entered a gas station, a
woman pulled up in her van, stepped out, looked
WILLIAM MULLINS-JOHNSON’S FIRST FEW MONTHS OF FREEDOM
at him oddly, and said, “Oh, you were in the
news. Congratulations.”
sodomized and murdered and that he was her
killer.
There was also an unexpected occurrence in a flea
market where a stranger approached and extended
his best wishes.
Mullins-Johnson was hopeful, at the time that his
brother Paul, whom he calls “Paulie”, would
come around because he had been given a copy of
the extensive brief prepared for the justice minister “and he is reading it so that is a positive
thing.”
A woman Mullins-Johnson didn’t even know sent
him a card and a $50.00 cheque after hearing his
mother on the radio.
This was particularly significant to MullinsJohnson because, with few exceptions, the only
mail he received in the penitentiary was sent by
his mother.
Another person he had never met sent MullinsJohnson a $300 cheque with a note saying that
she wanted him to use it for whatever he wanted
in life.
“It feels really good to be more than a number,”
he said.
Almost two weeks into his freedom MullinsJohnson thought he was making progress with life
outside prison - to the point that one day he had
trouble remembering his prison number. Good
things were happening, including the offer of a
job in a shipping and receiving department, which
he would be able to begin whenever he was ready.
At 6’5” and 260 pounds he was a natural for the
job.
Mullins-Johnson also wanted to enroll in school
and take courses, which are going to help him
understand where the world has moved since he
entered prison so many years ago.
“It’s (the education) kind of going to help me see
what I want to do,” he said. There were also new
experiences, such as trying out new foods and
taking his first subway ride.
But Mullins-Johnson was all too aware that no
matter what he did to begin his new future, he
would remain under a huge dark cloud in his
former Sault Ste. Marie community and in his
family.
He knew that he would have to try to work things
out with Valin’s father, his brother Paul, with
whom he was once very close, and other members of his family, who have been led by police
and the courts to believe that little Valin had been
He was also well aware that Paul attended his trial
only to testify for the prosecution but does not
begrudge him for not staying there to support
him, saying, “I think he just wanted to stay away
from that.”
“Paulie and the others will learn from the brief
that there was no evidence and there was no
crime,” he said. “Out of it I just hope that I will be
able to go home and visit,” he said.
The happy part of the visit was a barbeque hosted
by Gord and Anna Boissoneau, his aunt and
uncle, which was also attended by lots of cousins,
and a team from CTV’s W5, which is preparing a
documentary on his case.
“It was a wonderful sight to see Bill playing with
his young cousins and holding a baby for the first
time in so many years” said AIDWYC’s Win
Wahrer, who had accompanied Mullins-Johnson
to the Sault. “The whole family surrounded him
and lavished him with their hugs.”
Bill says his reunion with Leslie at the barbeque
was initially tense but quickly warmed up to the
point that the two brothers who had been separated by such a massive divide ended up going to
a hockey game that evening.
“Even if I can’t live there anymore I would like to
be able to work some of this stuff out - at least
just a bit - where people can live with it.”
“I am willing to talk to all of my brothers,” Mullins-Johnson added. “But I’m going to let them
deal with things on their own because they are
men now, and I can’t make anybody do anything
no more than anybody can make me think or do
anything.”
Bill Mullins-Johnson would find out where things
stood back home. On October 28th he flew to
Sault Ste. Marie to help his mom relocate her
home.
Mullins-Johnson had kept quiet about the trip but deep in his heart he feared that the news might
have leaked out and that he would face the wrath
of a community that still believed he was guilty.
But he also saw this trip as an opportunity to
revisit the home where he had grown up, to spend
time with his great-uncle Gord and his family,
and above all to begin healing the breach that
existed between him and his brothers Paul,
Valin’s dad, and Leslie.
That would not be an easy job.
Paul likely still believed he committed the horrid
crimes even though the newly released forensic
made crystal clear that Valin had died a natural
death.
are proud to support AIDWYC
Freedom of the press - we make it happen
CAN YOU HELP AIDWYC?
ASSOCIATION IN DEFENCE OF THE WRONGLY CONVICTED
BECOME A MEMBER OF AIDWYC
Please return this form and your cheque payable to AIDWYC (or the
JUR-ED Foundation) to:
Membership in AIDWYC costs just $50 annually and entitles you to
receive all information distributed regarding the organization's regular activities, including the AIDWYC Journal.
AIDWYC, 85 King Street East, Suite 318, 3rd Floor, Toronto, Ontario, M5C 1G3,
Canada
If you would like to receive further editions, please use the form to
send us your subscription. Donations of any amount are always welcome. Back issues of the Journal are available on AIDWYC's website
at: www.aidwyc.org.
We also need the voluntary services of lawyers and private investigators to assist in the process of determining which cases to adopt. If
you can give some of your time to investigate or review a case, please
contact us.
The activist and lobbying activities of AIDWYC preclude our giving
a charitable receipt for your AIDWYC membership dues and contributions.
However, we can provide a charitable receipt for general donations to
the JUR-ED Foundation, AIDWYC's educational division and its
special funds and projects which perform important research and
public education.
Yes, I would like to become a member of AIDWYC for 2006. Enclosed is my
cheque for $50.
Yes, I would like to make a donation to AIDWYC. Enclosed is my cheque in
the amount of:
$25.00
$50.00
$100.00
Other $___________
Name:_________________________________________________________
Organization:___________________________________________________
Address: ______________________________________________________
City: _________________________ Province: ________________________
Postal Code: ___________________ Country: ________________________
Telephone: ____________________ Fax: ____________________________
Email: _________________________________________________________
CAN AIDWYC HELP YOU?
If you, or someone you know, has been wrongly
convicted and think that AIDWYC can be of help
- please keep in mind the following criteria
before contacting us:
1. We can only review cases of conviction on
serious offences (almost exclusively murder),
where you do not have the financial resources to
hire expert defence counsel. With our limited
resources, we have to prioritize.
2. The evidence in the case must be consistent
with factual innocence.
3. You must have already been tried and convicted and largely exhausted your possibilities
for appeal.
If you meet all three criteria, send us a brief outline of the facts of the case and its current status.
Include your name and address, plus the name,
address, telephone number and email (if available) of a relative or friend whom we may contact on your behalf. We will also need contact
information for your current or most recent lawyer.
On receiving the above, we will send out an
information sheet for you to complete which will
give us the basic information on your case,
together with a release form to give AIDWYC
access to any additional information we may
need. When we have received these completed
documents, we will contact you for any specifics
required to get started on review.
Once we begin the review process, we need to
find a lawyer to donate time to read over the
materials and make an assessment of the merits
of the case. The lawyer will submit a recommendation to our Review Committee which will then
decide whether to adopt or - for international
cases, endorse - the case. For international cases
we give our support in any way we can.
Please also be aware that we receive a great number of requests for assistance and that all of our
work to date has been accomplished with very little funding. The process of review may take
months or years and we are dependent on the voluntary assistance offered to us by lawyers who
are willing to give their time and expertise.
While this should not discourage anyone from
applying to AIDWYC, it is important to have
realistic expectations about acceptance criteria
and the amount of time required.
If the case is in Canada, where our lawyers practice, we will then make application for legal aid
to take the case further - to the appellate courts if
possible; to the Minister of Justice under section
696.1 (formerly section 690) of the Criminal
Code, if not.
ASSOCIATION IN DEFENCE OF THE WRONGLY CONVICTED
85 King Street East, Suite 318, 3rd Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M5C 1G3 Canada
Phone: (416) 504-7500
Fax: (416) 203-9088
email: [email protected]
website: www.aidwyc.org

THE MULLINS-JOHNSON CASE: THE MURDER THAT WASN`T

Transcription

Similar documents

digital evidence

New Project Aims for Innocent Women`s Liberation

Helter Skelter In 1968 convicted serial killer Charles Manson(b

Criminal Records and Expungement

hot picks - HoneyBee Child

Westchester Police Chiefs back expanding NY DNA database

Court visits scene of shooting

application for employment personal information