Monday, 14 December 2020

Selfless Warrior Estelle Blackburn: John Button/Darryl Beamish: (West Australia): "There I was working for the premier, and suddenly this chance meeting happened and I realised I couldn’t re-investigate a 30-odd-year-old murder and work for a premier," she said . "So I gave it up, got myself a two-day-a-week little salaried job and started to look at the murders of 30 years previously. It took a lot of work, a lot of sleuthing, so clearly I couldn’t work full-time. I sold an investment house to fund myself. It cost me my financial security, but it’s enriched me in every other way." Estelle Blackburn.


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I feel some trepidation writing about  Estelle  Blackburn's story because it has been the subject of so many books, TV documentaries and articles, by people much more entitled to write about the case than myself. However, I feel justified in undertaking this task, because my purpose   is to  include Estelle  Blackburn in this group of 'Selfless Warriors' - by definition "Those exceptional individuals who  are ripped out of their ordinary lives by their inability to stand by in the face of a glaring miscarriage of justice." To help the reader   understand Estelle Blackburn's extraordinary actions, I am beginning with a 'very concise partial chronological account' of the events which intersected her life with the lives of John Button,  Darryl Beamish and the infamous Eric Edgar Cooke.  This is a very 'unliterary' approach - but I think it works.
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
VERY CONCISE  (PARTIAL) CHRONOLOGY: (Thanks to Wikipedia for helpful entries, including Estelle Blackburn, Darryl Beamish, John Button, and 'Broken Lives'.)
1959: Darryl Beamish:  an 18-year-old deaf mute is arrested for the murder of a 22-year-old socialite and heiress named  Jillian  MacPherson Brewer, who  was slain in her flat by an intruder who mutilated her body with a tomahawk and a pair of dressmaking scissors. 
1961: The deaf mute is convicted of murder after police allege they had taken four statements - in spite of his insistence that the confessions were untrue and obtained through intimidation and threats. The bad news; He is sentenced to death by hanging; The good? news (so to speak) is that his sentence  is commuted to  life imprisonment of which he serves 15 years. His appeal is dismissed - as are all  his subsequent appeals and applications to appeal.  Game over? (Spoiler alert): Not quite! 
1963: Eric Edgar Cooke is arrested. (Welcome news in Perth).
1963: John  Button, another West Australian,  is jailed for five years after being convicted of manslaughter in the death of his girlfriend Rosemary Anderson whom he had allegedly run over with his car. So what does that have to do with the afore-mentioned Darryl Beamish? (Spoiler alert): Everything! (Stay tuned).
1964: Shortly before being hung  on October 26, 1964,  arch-criminal serial murderer Eric Edgar Cooke, who terrorised Perth in the 1960's, voluntarily takes the bible from the prison chaplain and says,"I swear before almighty God that I killed Anderson and Brewer."  Cooke had confessed to twenty-two violent crimes — eight murders and fourteen attempted murders and assaults — during a five-year period between September 1958 and September 1963. The police however choose to keep his murders of Rosemary Anderson and Jillian Brewer off of the list. Cooke's gallows confession, which was later discovered by Estelle Blackburn, prove initially to be  of no value to Beamish and Button, because shortly after making the confessions which exonerated them, he is lying in his grave. To make matters  even worse, the police  and the appeal courts dismiss Cooke's gallows confession as "utterly worthless" and the work of a "palpable and unscrupulous liar"  - while   maintaining that the statements which the men said had been obtained by intimidation and threats, in the absence of lawyers and family - from two scared young men, who had maintained their innocence from the outset -  were true. (I was pretty shocked to learn that the appeal judges  had chosen  to ignore the fact that  a serial killer had confessed  to the killings in the shadow of the gallows). So, as you will see in a moment, both men were eventually released as convicted murderers, desperate to clear their names for the rest of  their lives. The odds of success were however not very good, until 1991, when a brilliant journalist named Estelle Blackburn, who loved dancing, came along. (As you keep reading dear reader, you will learn  how  an extraordinary journalist's love of dancing led to the exoneration of two innocent men who had been convicted of horrible crimes.)
1964: Beamish loses his appeal: 
------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION TO ESTELLE BLACKBURN:
As noted above, the police, backed up initially by the courts, chose to believe that Cooke's confession (moments before his execution)  was false - and that Button's and Beamish's confessions (the ones coerced from them) were true. Had the police paid attention to Cooke's seemingly random selection of victims and his various methods of assault (as Estelle Blackburn later did) - and had the police conducted the most sophisticated, up-to-date collision impact reconstruction techniques that Blackburn and her colleagues conducted - Button and Beamish would not  likely have been convicted,  let alone charged with their respective offences. This is a huge point in the 'Selfless Warrior' context. She was not a trained police officer. She had no legal training. At the time Button and Beamish came into her life, she was (as reporters often  refer to them)  a 'flack' - a press secretary in the office of the Premier of West Australia." Nice cushy job. Clean gloves. Far away from the blood-soaked grimy world of criminal justice.  So how did Estelle  Blackburn become  transformed into a 'Selfless Warrior' - and what did her love of dancing have to do with it?  Stay tuned.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A CHANCE MEETING! 
In an interview with Sydney Morning Herald reporter Ben Pobjie, Blackburn says that  she was working as a press secretary to the premier of West Australia, "when I went to a dance and an odd guy – he was a bit doubtful but he was a great dancer so I danced with this guy every Thursday for quite a while. And a friend of mine came over from England and he was wrongly charged with something. He rang me from the police lockup and said “Help, Estelle.” So I rang this dancing guy, Jim, and said I can’t come dancing tonight, a friend of mine’s been framed by the cops, I’ve got to help him. And Jim said don’t talk to me about the police framing people: they framed my brother for a murder Cooke did.   I lived through Cooke’s terror, I was 13 at the time. It struck terror in my heart hearing the name again. I got my friend sorted out, and of course, [as a] nosy journo: "what’s all this about Cooke and your brother?" And that’s how it happened. A chance meeting at a dance, and a chance wrongful charge of a friend.
A 'promo' for her book 'Writing Broken Lives'  describes her story as, "the story of a thirteen-year journey that exposed injustice and led to John Button and Darryl Beamish being exonerated. It began with a jive with a stranger on a warm Thursday night in November 1991,"  and adds that,  "It's hard to believe, but it took over thirty years for that black cloud to be lifted off of Button's and Beamish's heads  -  and that may not have happened if Estelle  Blackburn had not loved dancing."
I get the impression however that the story entered her life at a time when she sorely needed something more than the everyday life she was living, as per the following  ABC interview in which,  "Ms Blackburn spoke courageously of some events in her life that changed her forever and triggered an awakening which led to the tremendous work that Ms Blackburn has now accomplished."

"Two life crises hit me at the same time. I turned 40 - time to review what you're doing - and my mother died in the same week, so another reason to review what you're doing," she said, the interview continues.

"It made me think that is churning out political propaganda really what I'm about? 

"I hadn't done anything worthwhile, I hadn't raised children, I had a very hedonistic happy-go-lucky life till then and that did set me thinking that maybe I should do something before it's my turn; I was the next cab off the rank in the family deaths. 

"The stars aligned and by absolute chance I met John Button's brother at a dance." 

"He told me about his brother being wrongfully convicted and that would have meant nothing to me before except not long before that - 25 years ago this week - the Guildford Four were released from jail in the UK after 15 years."

"I had lived through those IRA bombings in London and I was glad when they were convicted along with The Guildford Four, I was like, 'hurray they have the right person'.

"Then in '91, 'oh hang on', what is this about injustice? 

"It started an awakening and made me really curious." 

Indeed, as Blackburn told Reporter  Pobjie: "There I was working for the premier, and suddenly this chance meeting happened and I realised I couldn’t re-investigate a 30-odd-year-old murder and work for a premier," she said . "So I gave it up, got myself a two-day-a-week little salaried job and started to look at the murders of 30 years previously. It took a lot of work, a lot of sleuthing, so clearly I couldn’t work full-time. I sold an investment house to fund myself. It cost me my financial security, but it’s enriched me in every other way."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

FRESH EVIDENCE: 
In the course of  his interview with 'Australian Presbyterian' Button says  Blackburn explained that the government would only re-open the case if they could produce 'fresh evidence,' - a pursuit that ended up taking six and a half years - culminating in Blackburn's important  book 'Broken Lives,' which convinced the government to reopen the case.  It took time to find all seven girls who had been run down by Cooke but survived, and to gain  their confidence so that they agreed to reopen old wounds and       tell her their stories. It also took time to try and find the five other attempted murder victims who had been attacked while asleep - finding all but one who died of cancer a couple of years after the attack. Through this evidence, Blackburn's lawyer would be able to convince the appeals court that the two murders of which Beamish  and Button had been convicted, closely resembled multiple other murders committed by Cooke, details of which had been withheld by the police from the public. During the course of his interview with 'Australian Presbyterian,' Button says that Blackburn, whom he regards as a 'sister', used her government networks to access police, prison and legal files,  following each lead with 'Terrier-like' determination during the six and a half years it took to write 'Broken Lives' - the book, published in 1998, which single-handedly prompted the government to re-open the case after so many decades. Blackburn had  even managed to find important witnesses who had not been interviewed by the police - one in particular  who could corroborate Cooke's confession who had not been interviewed at all.)  Also,  'Broken Lives' publisher  Bret Christian oversaw and funded  the hiring, and bringing to Australia, of a  U.S,  motor vehicle accident reconstruction expert, to prove, as he did, that John Button's car was not involved in Ms. Anderson's death - a central part of the prosecution's case. The expert's up-to-date reconstruction techniques were accepted as 'fresh evidence' on Button's successful appeal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IMPACT OF 'BROKEN LIVES' - 'THE BOOK THAT STARTED IT ALL.'
The impact was palpable. Published in November, 1998, to the backdrop of two major Television programs - the ABC's 'Australian Story' and later,  'Sixty Minutes.' It prompted an urgency motion in the State Parliament, leading  to the Attorney-General's decision to grant Button  a new appeal. Button's conviction was quashed  by the Court of Criminal Appeal on February 25, 2002, after the evidence from vehicle crash experts produced by Blackburn and her colleagues, 
In his review of 'The end of innocence' -  a companion  book to 'Broken Lives' by Estelle Blackburn - author Rob Guthrie writes, "Broken Lives uncovered a modus operandi for Cooke which involved stealing cars, driving through lonely streets at night and running down women. Cooke was never charged with these running-down incidents and the four or five women who were involved in these separate cases were unaware of each others plight." He adds that, "Perhaps the biggest achievement for Blackburn was that  she uncovered the fact that Cooke was not only a murderer but that he had confessed to a remarkable series of housebreaking and hit-and-run collisions. .........When Cooke confessed to the murder of the women for whom Button and Beamish had been held responsible, his evidence was not believed. By uncovering Cooke's hit-and-run exploits, Blackburn was able to show that Button's girlfriend, Rosemary Anderson, had not been run down by Button, but had been the subject of another of Cooke's hit-and-run episodes. Likewise, through the evidence she gathered, Blackburn was able to show that Jillian Brewer was not stabbed to death by Beamish but, rather, by Cooke."
------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL CHRONOLOGY: 
2003: John Button is handed $460,000 compensation.
2005: (April 1):  Darryl Beamish, wins his new appeal (and is thereby exonerated)  on the basis of the same fresh evidence, and with the same pro bono legal team and Bret Christian leading the support work – as with Button,  the murder attributed to Cooke. (This is the moment where the Beamish and Button cases  are sewn firmly together: Beamish won his appeal because the success of Button's appeal raised doubts about the court's reasons  for rejecting Cooke's confession to killing Jillian Brewer  in Beamish's 1964 appeal.)
2011: June 2:  The state government announces it will make a $425,000 ex gratia payment to Darryl Beamish.  Attorney-General Christian Porter expressed the government's "sincere regret" this morning while announcing the sum to be paid to Mr Beamish, who is deaf and mute, and spent 15 years in jail before winning a lengthy court battle to clear his name.

---------------------------------------------------------------

A SELFLESS WARRIOR'S SACRIFICE: ABC  NEWS:

"Ms Blackburn's book 'The End of Innocence'  tells her story of the years of research and writing 'Broken Lives', which involved a cruel and personal twist that while she was engaged in her ground-breaking investigation of injustice she was herself trapped in a relationship with a violent but persuasive psychopath. 

"After the success of this work, I did gain some renown but it cost me 13 years of sacrificed salary... and I realized I better get my crusading on the back burner and earn a living," she said. 

"It impoverished me financially because this was all self-funded; I didn't manage to achieve any grants but in every other way it's been wonderful for me to feel that I've actually done something decent with my life." 

----------------------------------------------------------------

PUBLIC RECOGNITION:

Not surprisingly, Estelle Blackburn received numerous awards including the Medal of The Order of Australia "For service to the community through investigative journalism in Western Australia." (It's not every day when an investigative journalist receives such national recognition - although I suspect this was probably the last thing in her mind during all these years when she steadfastly fought to exonerate Beamish and Button.)  Some media tributes stand out: The Sydney Morning Herald acknowledged that, "Button and Beamish served long sentences before being cleared and compensated, mainly because of the dogged work of investigative reporter Estelle Blackburn." To ABC News, "Estelle Blackburn is the woman universally credited with uncovering the truth about one of Australia's most notorious serial killers, Eric Cooke." To Cheri Gardner, who runs a 'speakers' agency, "Coming across the story by chance and persisting with it turned Estelle’s life around.  Here was a courageous woman who without a second thought impoverished herself to fight the cause for strangers.  With no legal training and armed only with extraordinary qualities of courage and determination, she took on the system and won in a 10- year combined exercise in authorship and citizen advocacy.  Because of her vision, hard work and self sacrifice the justice system may have been set on a truer course."

------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMENTARY: In winding up, I don't think I have to provide any more reason as to why, in my books, Estelle Blackburn is a 'Selfless Warrior."  However,  there is something to add. I have learned from the previous posts in this series, that 'Selfless Warriors' do not always work alone.  They often have an ability - due to visceral  passion and belief - to inspire others to join in the battle to right the injustice. For instance, Bret Christian, publisher of 'Broken Lives',  at his own expense  supplemented Blackburn's fresh evidence with the crucial scientific evidence of crash testing, and solicitor Jonathan Davies and barrister Tom Percy QC took Button’s case to the Court of Criminal Appeal pro bono in a successful bid to quash Button's conviction on the basis that Cooke was the murderer. Davies and Percy  then, working  pro bono, proceeded to win Beamish's appeal, once again  aided by Christian's support. Christian. Davies.  Percy. "In a sense they were 'Selfless Warriors' too.  I will leave the last words to Estelle Blackburn, from  the interview with 'Australian Presbyterian.'

"Estelle said that she felt morally bound to do something to correct the injustice perpetrated on John Button."

“John had tried everything he could. There was a man crying for help and I had the writing and researching skills that could help him. How could I turn my back?"

“While I have lost all my financial resources to this, I have gained much – not least an enduring friendship with John, Helen and their family. But, single and childless and now 50, it has given me the opportunity to give something back in gratitude for the blessings I have received throughout my life.""

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

READING MATERIALS:

Broken Lives: Estelle Blackburn:

174064073X

End of Innocence: Estelle Blackburn:

https://www.amazon.com/INNOCENCE-remarkable-story-womans-justice/dp/B008AV6REO

Writing Broken Lives: Estelle Blackburn: (To be published soon);

https://www.echobooks.com.au/biography/writing-broken-lives/

Why me Lord? John Button: 

https://www.amazon.com/WHY-ME-LORD-John-Button/dp/0646364669

NETK: (Networked Knowledge): John Button Page: Excellent source material on the Button and Beamish cases. 

http://netk.net.au/ButtonHome.asp

Australian Presbyterian:

https://ap.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/AP2000-05.pdf

ABC sound recordings: (This is wonderful: Photographs and texts);

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-14/eric-edgar-cooke-serial-killer-voice-heard-53-years-later/9122724?nw=0

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Selfless Warriors Blog. (Thanks to my daughter, Kyra Jolliet, for her most appreciated editing assistance - after I had already put the mistakes online in my  usual eagerness to get the post online! HL)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sunday, 6 December 2020

Selfless Warrior: An unnamed mother/Nelson Cruz: Brooklyn: Major (unwelcome) development: Rare review of cases handled by judge forced into retirement by dementia finds no "irrationality" in her handling of this case, Forensic Magazine reports.


PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  In a previous post on this 'Selfless Warrior's Blog' I introduced the post as follows: "My salute to a 'Selfless Warrior' - a mother who's name I don't even know. Her son: Nelson Cruz: Brooklyn...Not in a position to get the investigation he needed to establish his alibi for the murder, he turned to his mother for help, directed her investigation from the prison, and she found new evidence which could open the door to yet another appeal. (Nelson Cruz is still in prison after more than 22 years behind bars - and his case cries out innocence.) " The post details one of the strangest twists I have ever seen played out in a courtroom: the judge, who had been known for her fairness and for giving people a second chance,  became ill with Alzheimer's disease, closed the door to his release. You can read the  entire post at:

https://selflesswarriors.blogspot.com/2020/10/the-selfless-warrior-my-salute-to.html

As this new November 25, 2020 post, also  by Pro Publication reporter Joe Sexton  points out, Nelson Cruz pinned  his hopes on a review that had been ordered after Judge ShawnDya Simpson retired because of early onset Alzheimer's disease to determine whether the judge’s illness had affected her handling of cases in the months, maybe years before she was forced from the bench.  Sadly for Nelson Cruz, and perhaps others, we learn from Reporter Sexton's  follow-up story that the court officials who conducted the review  determined that, "none of the status conference orders or decisions on motions were found to be irrational." As you will see from the new story, which you will find at the link below,  Cruz's lawyer hasn't given up hope. "Informed of the review’s results, Justin Bonus, a lawyer for Cruz, said he remained confident he could establish Simpson was impaired when she denied his client’s motion to vacate his conviction." “Her irrationality,” Bonus said, “was evident.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Nelson Cruz had an intense interest in the outcome of the review. Cruz, convicted of murder when he was a teenager in Brooklyn in 1999, had been granted a long-sought hearing on his innocence by Simpson. He was optimistic, for Simpson had already overturned two convictions of men who had been sent away on murder charges, cases that involved questionable conduct by detectives who had also worked on Cruz’s case." But over two years, Cruz and his lawyers came to worry something was wrong with Simpson. There were long delays and a series of what they regarded as inexplicable decisions in the case. In August 2019, just days before her illness led to a formal medical leave, she denied Cruz’s bid for freedom. When Cruz’s lawyers learned of the judge’s illness nearly a year later, they filed papers to have her decision vacated, arguing it was clear she had been impaired."

------------------------------------------------------------------

STORY:  "Rare review of cases handled by judge forced into retirement by dementia," by reporter Joe Sexton,  published by ProPublica on November 25, 2020.

GIST: "In August, New York court officials made a sad and surprising announcement: ShawnDya Simpson, a 54-year-old judge, was retiring because of early onset Alzheimer’s disease. It was both a tragedy and a dilemma: How would anyone know whether the judge’s illness had affected her handling of cases in the months, maybe years before she was forced from the bench?

In October, court officials announced they would do something rare: conduct a review of scores of the judge’s orders and decisions to see if there were obvious examples of mistakes or misguided judgments.

This week, court officials announced the results of the review. Officials said a State Supreme Court justice had reviewed 40 of the judge’s decisions and orders, as well as 1,000 status conference orders on routine issues.

“None of the status conference orders or decisions on motions were found to be irrational,” said Lucian Chalfen, a spokesman for the Office of Court Administration.

“It was clear that the decisions and orders were written addressing the particular actions, in other words not block copied one from another, as they addressed particular facts and arguments in each individual motion and the decisions were appropriate to the arguments,” Chalfen added.

Chalfen said the review consisted of Simpson’s year sitting as a judge in the Bronx. Simpson had been moved to the Bronx from Brooklyn after complaints about her productivity, demeanor and failure to show up in court on time. Chalfen did not say why the review had been limited to Simpson’s final year.

Nelson Cruz had an intense interest in the outcome of the review. Cruz, convicted of murder when he was a teenager in Brooklyn in 1999, had been granted a long-sought hearing on his innocence by Simpson. He was optimistic, for Simpson had already overturned two convictions of men who had been sent away on murder charges, cases that involved questionable conduct by detectives who had also worked on Cruz’s case.

But over two years, Cruz and his lawyers came to worry something was wrong with Simpson. There were long delays and a series of what they regarded as inexplicable decisions in the case. In August 2019, just days before her illness led to a formal medical leave, she denied Cruz’s bid for freedom. When Cruz’s lawyers learned of the judge’s illness nearly a year later, they filed papers to have her decision vacated, arguing it was clear she had been impaired.

While Cruz’s case was handed off to another judge, the review announced by court officials held promise for Cruz and his lawyers: Any instance in which her decisions were determined to be flawed would bolster their own claim.

Informed of the review’s results, Justin Bonus, a lawyer for Cruz, said he remained confident he could establish Simpson was impaired when she denied his client’s motion to vacate his conviction.

“Her irrationality,” Bonus said, “was evident.”

Early onset Alzheimer’s is notoriously difficult to diagnose. When Simpson’s illness was confirmed by doctors in early 2020, she was said to be in the middle stages of the disease.

When Simpson’s retirement was announced, some court officials, lawyers and others involved with the court system wondered about Simpson’s law secretary, what in the federal system is known as a judge’s clerk. Law secretaries have a daily and intimate window into a judge’s work, and indeed often do the lion’s share of case research and the drafting of written opinions.

Simpson’s law secretary has not responded to calls, emails and texts from ProPublica seeking her insight.

This week, asked if the review of Simpson’s cases involved discussions with her former law secretary, Chalfen said, “We do not get involved with a judge’s judicial decisions, which would include who would write a particular decision and order.”

Francis Shen, a lawyer and professor who has studied America’s aging judiciary, for whom questions of impairment have become more acute, said he was not surprised by the outcome of the review.

“It would be difficult to determine after the fact the ways in which gradual but real cognitive decline might affect courtroom decision-making and rulings,” Shen said. “Just because rulings are not ‘irrational’ does not mean they are not potentially problematic.”

Cruz’s case is currently assigned to Justice Raymond Rodriguez. It is not clear what next steps he is contemplating or when they might happen.

The entire story can be read at: 

570649-Rare-Review-of-Cases-Handled-by-Judge-Forced-Into-Retirement-by-Dementia

------------------------------------------------------------------------

For insights into flawed pathology and flawed pathologists - and many related and unrelated matters turn to my companion Blog, The Charles Smith Blog, at:

smithforensic.blogspot.com

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
























Monday, 30 November 2020

Selfless Warrior Win Wahrer/Guy Paul Morin: "Win is one of a kind. There are others who have given their life for a cause - but when I heard how it all came about for her - taking on the Canadian criminal justice system without a law degree and then becoming a founding member of the only organization in Canada to help free those wrongly convicted, her story is nothing short of a Hollywood thriller. Win lives her life like everyone matters and would do just about anything to help someone who has suffered an injustice. She is their relentless hero, their warrior." Filmmaker Lori Kuffner.


 THE CRIME: Every parent's nightmare. A nine-year-old daughter disappears sometime after being dropped off at home by the school bus. The parents come home and  find her school bag on the counter - but no sign of Christine. Something is terribly wrong.  The parents call the police,  a search is launched, but after several days there is no sign of her at all. No sign for months, until her body  is found over 50 kilometres from her home. Stabbed to death, semen  on her underwear. A family mourns, a community mourns -  the small town of Queensville, Ontario,  and cries out for an arrest, and Paul Morin soon becomes one of the most notorious murder suspects in Ontario's history. (Chronology below):
THE SUSPECT:  (Guy  Paul Morin  (born in 1961) spent 10 years of his life – and 18 months in prison – living with the stigma of a horrifying crime: the sexual assault and murder of a nine-year-old girl. (In 1984))  As Innocence Canada tells us,  Paul hardly fit the profile of the archetypical murderer/rapist. At the time of Christine’s disappearance, he was  working as a finishing sander with a furniture manufacturing firm, he  also played the saxophone and clarinet, was a bee-keeper, and helped his father with renovations on the family home. Paul and his parents would later testify that on the day Christine vanished, Paul had brought the groceries in, taken a nap and then worked on the renovations until after dinner. However,  the police, having been  told by Christine's mother that their neighbor was a “weird-type guy” who played the clarinet,  zeroed in on him as a suspect. Although all signs pointed to innocence, the police stuck to their 'weird-type guy' theory, and arrested him on April 22, 1985. The good news is that on February 7, 1986,  Paul was acquitted, the bad news - terribly bad news for a young man charged with  rape and first-degree murder of a 9-year-old girl - is that in Canada,  prosecutors can appeal jury verdicts of acquittal on the basis of an alleged error in law by the trial judge.  And so they did. The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal ordering a new trial;  The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the Court of Appeal decision; The new trial was held, and, unlike the first trial,  on July 30, 1992,  Paul Morin was convicted of First-Degree murder punishable by life imprisonment. (That was a horrible prospect for  Paul, an  innocent man  who was later cleared by DNA evidence, and earlier this year learned on October 15, 2020, like the rest of us, that an ongoing investigation by The Toronto Police Service had established, through ancestral DNA evidence,  that Christine Jessop's  real killer was a man  named Calvin Hoover, who had subsequently killed himself.)
SELFLESS WARRIOR:  (PART ONE): Many people, as is noted below,  played a role  in freeing and exonerating  Paul Morin.  However, one stands out in my books.  She is Win Wahrer, who, at the time that   Paul was  going through his hellish experience was a total stranger to him, who, in fact, lived in the town of Pickering about 70 kilometres away. Like most of the 'Selfless Warriors' in this series, Win was also a stranger to the criminal justice system. She lived a busy life, centered around her children and her church, and it would likely have stayed that way if, she hadn't one day read an article about Paul  Morin  in a copy of the Toronto Star,  which she had received as a promotion. In a recent interview, Win explained that when she looked at the picture accompanying the article,  somewhere inside her a chord had been struck - unlike anything she had ever experienced before  - and a voice inside her said, "Oh my God. They've got the wrong guy." (The article had appeared between Paul's acquittal at his first trial and the start of the second trial sought  by the prosecutors and sanctioned by the courts.) Win is convinced that some very special forces were at work. She was uneducated in the law, had no  personal experience whatsoever in the criminal justice system, and doubts whether she would have had such a visceral reaction to the photograph unless something else was going on. The experience prompted her to read everything she could get her hands on about the Morin case,  and communicated her belief in his innocence and her concern over Paul's plight to anyone who would listen. Time marched on, Paul's trial finally began, and on July 30th, 1992, while driving on a highway, listening to the news, she was stunned on hearing the news announcer report that Guy Paul Morin had been convicted of first  degree murder,  and she had  to pull over. "I was outraged," Win  told me. "An innocent, young man had just been convicted of a rape and murder which he did not commit of raping and murdering a nine-year-old girl. I  had to do something."  There, on the spot, she  decided to write two letters: One to Guy Paul Morin's lawyer Jack Pinkofsky, to encourage him to appeal, and one to Guy Paul Morin's family offering them whatever help she could provide. Win says she write Pinkofsky because she realised that he must have been devastated by the verdict (especially following the acquittal in the first trial), and she wrote the family,  because she was concerned that because of all of the outrage that would be directed against Paul following the verdict, they would need all the support and empathy that they could get. Win says that she told the family in her letter that if Christine Jessop was pointing a finger from the grave, it would not be at their their son. A short time later, Win received a phone call from Mrs. Morin who thanked her for 'the lovely note' and connected her with Paul's sister Diane who invited Win to attend a meeting at which measures to rally support for Paul, such as a petition, were to be discussed. At the meeting, the family asked Win to assist two other people in  putting together a petition protesting the unfairness of Paul's trial, which she did. It was decided to call the Group (which never had more than six members) the Justice for Guy Paul Morin Committee.  One of the first major challenges of the committee was to engage community support for Guy Paul Morin's release pending the appeal of his conviction to The Supreme Court of Canada. Under Win's leadership, the members of the committee threw  themselves into this  task which was extremely important because it is easier to win at trial   when the jurors are aware that the accused  is not in custody. It was also important to get  Paul, who they firmly believed was innocent, out of prison, a brutal, dangerous environment in which he did not belong. So Win and her colleagues went to work, making up strategies as they moved along. For a start they began knocking on doors - including the door to my office in the Editorial Board of The Toronto Star. (Win had become official spokesperson for the group). Win came to my home one evening and sold me on the weaknesses of the prosecution case and the unfairness of the trial. She was extremely knowledgeable, extremely convincing. As a result of her visit, I did further research, and  convinced the paper to support  Paul's release on bail - not an easy task where the accused has been convicted of first degree murder in the rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl -  and I was asked to write the editorial, which ended up being filed by the defence as an exhibit on the bail hearing. Indeed, I remember reading some of the language I used in the editorial in   Justice Marvin Katzman's decision ordering Paul's release. When I asked Win recently if she had run into hostility during her door to door encounters,  she replied that what moved most people was her  passionate belief  that Paul was innocent - and their astonishment  that someone would have the courage to stand up in their community for a child killer because of their belief.   "It was a time  before the social media era when there was little discussion of wrongful discussions, so people were interested " Win adds. "The thing that really fascinated people was that no one in our group knew Guy Paul Morin, that we would come to the defence of a total stranger."
A BIG MOMENT FOR WIN: SHE IS AT  KINGSTON PENITENTIARY WHEN PAUL IS FREED ON BAIL:
Win Wahrer provided enormous personal support and encouragement to  Paul's family and to Paul himself, whom she first saw 'free'  at Kingston Penitentiary, when she attended with the \ late, legendary  Rubin (Hurricane) Carter,   Paul's family,   sureties and the lawyers,  for the signing of papers and Guy Paul's release on bail. As Win described it to me in our recent interview: "I will always remember what Paul had done - trading stuff with other inmates so that he could buy  each of us a chocolate bar. It was his way to say thank you. And that was the first time I was able to give him a hug.  Then there was a gathering at his sister's house to welcome him home."  Win Wahrer added, in an immortal quote, "I don't know if I told you, but Paul wanted to thank me so he got a car out of the wreckers and rebuilt it and gave it to me as a gift."
SELFLESS WARRIOR (PART TWO):
What motivated Win Wahrer to step out of her ordinary busy family life to fight for a young man she did not previously know who had been accused of raping and killing a 9-year-old girl? In our recent interview, Win Wahrer attributes her empathy towards 'underdogs' to her experiences growing up in foster homes, saying,"I always related to people who society sort of looked down upon...I have an insatiable appetite to do the right thing." She remains puzzled by the manner in which she was drawn to the defence of Guy Paul Morin - especially since, at the time, she was shy, introverted, not an 'in your face kind of person,' and "there was no reason on the face of this planet that would lead me to something like this," except for one. Win Wahrer had a strong 'faith base' as a Christian, and therefore believed that, as someone who believed in God she had to do her best to do God's work on earth. One other reason perhaps. When she was 12-years old she read a book by Canadian author Isabel LeBordais exposing the wrongful conviction of a youth named Steven Truscott, who had been wrongfully convicted of the murder of a schoolmate named Lynn Harper and, for a while, before his exoneration decades later had been placed on death row. This tells me that Win Wahrer was motivated by a sense of justice. What other 12-year-old would read a book like this? For the above reasons alone, Win Wahrer is a stellar 'Selfless Warrior.' However there is yet another reason. After Paul was finally exonerated on January 23, 1995, Win became a founding member of AIDWYC - The Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (now known as Innocence Canada) - where she has played an important role in the exoneration of more than 20 people, and, irony of ironies, one of those people was Steven Truscott.
COMMENTARY:  Win Wahrer has a very special place in my life as a friend, and as a 'Selfless Warrior.' She would be the first to protest that many other people played important roles in the exoneration of Guy Paul Morin - great lawyers such as Jack Pinkofsky (Counsel on the second trial), James Lockyer (Appeal lawyer) and their teams, family, friends, other members of the public.  But I won't let Win off the hook so easily - as the role she played as an utter stranger to Guy Paul who couldn't stand by in the face of a glaring miscarriage of justice is so very special - and, as the accolades she has won over the years are so well deserved. For example, in her introduction of Win as a guest speaker at the Robson Hall Law School, at The University of Manitoba, her introducer concluded: "It is abundantly clear that Win Wahrer’s work with wrongful convictions has saved the lives of many. She brings hope to people during the darkest times of their lives and continues to provide them and their families support after their exonerations. Wahrer has had a storied career that started with her belief in another person’s innocence, coupled with her drive to stand up for and act on her belief." I will leave the last word, well, almost the last word, to filmmaker Lori Kuffner, also a friend and admirer of Win, "Win is one of a kind, She writes. There are others who have given their life for a cause -but when I heard how it all came about for her - taking on the Canadian criminal justice system without a law degree and then becoming a founding member of the only organization in Canada  to help free those wrongly convicted,  her story is nothing short of a Hollywood thriller.   Win lives her life like everyone matters and would do just about anything to help someone who has suffered an injustice.  She is their relentless hero, their warrior.  Anyone who knows her is glad she has answered this call. Wouldn't life be a better place, if we had more Wins in this world."
I couldn't agree more.

Harold Levy:  Publisher of The Selfless Warrior Blog.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

INNOCENCE CANADA ENTRY: (GUY PAUL MORIN): (Author Sarah  Harland-Hogan);

On October 3, 1984, nine-year-old Christine Jessop disappeared sometime after being dropped off at home by the school bus. When her parents came home, they found her school bag on the counter, but there was no sign of Christine. By early evening, her parents realized that something was terribly wrong and her mother called the police. Although the search for Christine lasted several days, there was no sign of her at all.

Christine’s body was not found until December 31, 1984, over 50 kilometers from her home. Christine had been stabbed to death. Investigators discovered semen stains on her underwear. Christine’s mom described her as “a happy, sensitive, lively, caring” fourth grader who “loved school and … sports, particularly baseball.” On January 7, 1985, Christine was buried in the cemetery behind her family home where she used to play. Her shocking, untimely death is all the more tragic in that her killer has not yet been brought to justice.

At the time of Christine’s disappearance, Guy Paul Morin was working as a finishing sander with a furniture manufacturing firm. He also played the saxophone and clarinet, was a bee-keeper, and helped his father with renovations on the family home. Guy and his parents would later testify that on the day Christine vanished, Guy had brought the groceries in, taken a nap and then worked on the renovations until after dinner.

The police first became interested in Guy on February 14, 1985, when Christine’s mother mentioned that their neighbor was a “weird-type guy” who played the clarinet. On February 19, police set up surveillance of the Morin home. On February 22, Guy was interviewed by two police officers. During this interview, Guy did not say anything that objectively could have been construed as a confession nor did he give any indication that he was responsible for Christine’s death. Nonetheless, the officers suspected he was responsible for her murder. The police thought it strange that Guy knew that Christine’s remains had been found across the Ravenshoe Road despite the fact it was public knowledge at the time. They also did not like the sound of a comment he made to the effect that “All little girls are sweet and beautiful, but grow up to be corrupt.” In addition, Guy made a snarky remark about his innocence, perhaps because he was irritated at being treated as a suspect.

After this interview, the investigators obtained Guy’s time card from work, which suggested that it would have been difficult or impossible for Guy to return from his job and abduct Christine before her parents’ return. However, the police remained convinced that this “weird-type guy” had sexually assaulted and murdered her.

Guy was arrested on April 22, 1985. Later that evening, the police searched the Morin home and took samples of his hair, blood, and saliva, which Guy voluntarily gave. During his six-hour interrogation, Guy repeatedly stated that he was innocent, but a full decade would elapse before his exoneration.

Guy’s First Trial

On January 7, 1986, the first of Guy’s two trials began. During this four-week event, the jury heard expert evidence suggesting that a hair stuck in Christine’s necklace “matched” Guy’s hair sample, and similarly, that three hairs found in Guy’s car “matched” Christine’s. Further, the experts testified that a number of fibres located on Christine’s clothing and recorder case could have come from Guy’s home and car.

The jury also heard from two of Guy’s cellmates – Mr. May and someone identified only as “Mr. X” – that he had confessed to killing Christine while incarcerated prior to his trial. Guy, in fact, never confessed anything in prison.

The defence team maintained that it was impossible for Guy to have left work at the hour indicated on his time card and have arrived at Christine’s house with enough time to commit the crime. Guy’s lawyers also argued that the hair and fibre evidence did not really prove anything, and they called their own experts who disagreed with the Crown experts’ analysis.

On February 7, 1986, the jury reached a verdict of not guilty. Guy was acquitted and set free. However, his struggle to clear his name had only just begun.

The Crown’s Appeal and Guy’s Second Trial

On March 4, 1986, the Attorney General of Ontario launched an appeal of Guy’s acquittal. The Crown claimed that the trial judge had made a mistake in directing the jury about the meaning of “reasonable doubt” and that the acquittal should therefore be thrown out and Guy retried. The Court of Appeal agreed, and on June 5, 1987, it ordered a new trial. Guy appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, but that Court dismissed his appeal on November 17, 1988. Guy was out of options; he would have to stand trial again.

This second trial began on May 28, 1990. The new jury heard similar evidence about the supposedly incriminating hairs and fibres, and about Guy’s alleged confession to Mr. May, overheard by Mr. X. Moreover, the jury also heard a great deal of new evidence from witnesses who had not testified at the first trial, but who had now recalled a wide range of damaging information – much of it focused on aspects of Guy’s behaviour shortly after Christine’s death that, in the witnesses’ opinion, had reflected his guilty conscience. For example, the Crown called a police constable who claimed to have visited the Morin residence on the night of Christine’s disappearance. The constable testified that he saw Guy, who appeared unconcerned that the young girl from next door had gone missing. Another member of Guy’s band testified that she had been shocked at the “very uncaring” way that he had remarked on Christine’s death. The Crown also called Christine’s best friend, who testified that the two girls had had several conversations with Guy – during which he had kept such a tight grip on his hedge clippers that his knuckles turned white. Another neighbor, Paddy Hester, testified that Guy had chased her away from his car (where the incriminating hair and fiber evidence had been found). Finally, Christine’s mother testified at the second trial that after Christine’s funeral, she and several guests had heard a man’s voice screaming, “Help me, help me, Oh God, help me.” She believed that this frightened, desperate voice was Guy’s.

On July 30, 1992, Guy was found guilty of first degree murder.

Guy’s Appeal and Acquittal

Fortunately, not everyone believed that Guy had committed this heinous crime. Immediately after Guy’s wrongful conviction, a grass-roots organization sprang up to aid him in his quest for exoneration. This group was called the Justice for Guy Paul Morin Committee, and it was the seed from which Innocence Canada (formerly AIDWYC) was born. The group’s first objective was to help Guy to appeal his conviction and in the meantime, to apply for his release on bail while he waited for the appeal to be decided. Guy and the Committee were successful: despite his murder conviction, Guy was granted bail on February 9, 1993. In the wake of this decision, the Committee reconstituted itself as the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC), now Innocence Canada, having decided to broaden its mandate from defending Guy, to working on behalf of all wrongly convicted Canadians.

Guy and what became the AIDWYC team had intended to win his appeal by demonstrating that neither the Crown’s hair and fibre evidence, nor the “jailhouse informant” evidence about his supposed confession, was reliable. But just days before they were to present these arguments to the Ontario Court of Appeal, DNA test results came in that made these issues moot. Several previous attempts to perform DNA testing on the semen stains found on Christine’s underpants had been unsuccessful, but the technology had now advanced enough that a more sophisticated test could be conducted. This test proved that the DNA in question could not belong to Guy. The Crown prosecutor explained the new findings to the Court as follows: “The evidence proves as an indisputable scientific fact that Mr. Morin is not guilty of the first degree murder of Christine Jessop, and should be acquitted.”

On January 23, 1995, the Ontario Court of Appeal set aside Guy’s conviction and entered an acquittal instead. The Crown prosecutor expressed his “deepest regret for all that” Guy and his family “had to endure.” Ten years after his arrest – and having spent 18 months in prison – Guy had finally proven his innocence and cleared his name.

On June 26, 1996, the Lieutenant Governor ordered that a public inquiry be conducted into the causes of Guy’s wrongful conviction. The resulting report, which was released in April 1998, identified numerous factors that had contributed to this egregious miscarriage of justice.

Causes of Guy’s Wrongful Conviction: Tunnel Vision

The root cause of Guy’s wrongful conviction is a dangerous and all too common phenomenon known as “tunnel vision.” Commissioner Kaufman, who wrote the Inquiry’s report described tunnel vision as “the single minded and overly narrow focus on an investigation or prosecutorial theory” – in this case, the theory that Guy had killed Christine – “so as to unreasonably colour the evaluation of information received and one’s conduct in response to the information.”  It is easy for police and prosecutors to fall into tunnel vision, particularly if they are under intense pressure to solve or prosecute a case. Tunnel vision is therefore a common feature found in many miscarriages of justice. Moreover, “it is a trap that can capture even the best police officer or prosecutor,” because “it is mutually reinforcing amongst police officers [and] … prosecutors.” Tunnel vision must therefore “be guarded against vigilantly.”

One way that prosecutors must guard against this trap is by keeping in mind that their role is not to secure a conviction, but rather to ensure that justice is done. This means that their role “excludes any notion of winning or losing,” as the Supreme Court put it in the now-famous case R v Boucher. In fact, the current Ontario Crown Policy Manual specifically comments that prosecutors must be “open to the possibility of the innocence of the accused person and avoid ‘tunnel vision.’”

Sadly, the prosecutors who worked on Guy’s case lost sight of these obligations. Commissioner Kaufman observed in his report that there were “various instances where the prosecutors called evidence which, objectively viewed, was highly suspect. At times, their perspective was coloured by their strong views as to [Guy Paul] Morin’s guilt,” and “they were unable … to objectively view the evidence” or to “be at all introspective about the very serious reliability problems with a number of their own witnesses.” Commissioner Kaufman also found that some of the people involved in Guy’s investigation and prosecution still suffered from “‘tunnel vision’ in the most staggering proportions” at the inquiry proceedings, despite the fact that Guy had been acquitted due to incontrovertible DNA evidence.

Causes of Guy’s Wrongful Conviction: Bad Science

In the Conclusion to his Report, Commissioner Kaufman commented that, “An innocent person was convicted of a heinous crime he did not commit. Science helped convict him. Science exonerated him.” It is very fortunate that we now live in an era where miscarriages of justice like Guy’s can be rectified through DNA testing. However, Guy was wrongly convicted in the first place due in part to the hair and fibre evidence that supposedly linked him to Christine’s murder. Commissioner Kaufman found that the forensic scientist who analyzed the hairs failed to adequately explain the limitations of these findings, meaning that the police thought that they provided stronger evidence linking Guy to Christine than was actually true. Moreover, it is generally agreed today that hair comparison evidence is not reliable enough to be used in a criminal trial, due to the “inherent frailties” of this type of evidence. James Driskell’s and Kyle Unger’s cases are two known cases where hair microscopy evidence contributed to a wrongful conviction.

The fibre evidence put forward by the Crown proved to be similarly unreliable. In fact, it was contaminated during the forensic investigation and although the scientists working with the fibres realized what had happened, they kept this information from the police and prosecutors. Leaving aside the contamination problem, the fibre evidence simply did not support the Crown’s position that it provided a link between Guy and Christine. Rather, the similarities observed between the fibres found on Christine’s clothing and those from Guy’s home and car were “equally explainable by random occurrence or environmental contamination” at the scene.

Disquietingly, as forensic science continues to evolve, it has become clear that many other forensic scientific techniques are much less reliable than we once believed. Shoe print comparison, bite mark analysis, firearm tool mark analysis, and other such techniques that have never been properly tested remain potential causes of wrongful convictions. Furthermore, even generally reliable, properly validated forensic techniques such as DNA typing and serology can produce inaccurate results if the samples are contaminated (as the fibre samples were in this case). Finally, the experts tasked with interpreting forensic scientific evidence for the court may make mistakes that can contribute to miscarriages of justice, as in the many wrongful convictions resulting from the infamously inaccurate testimony of Dr. Charles Smith.

Causes of Guy’s Wrongful Conviction: Unreliable Witness Testimony

As discussed above, a number of witnesses testified at Guy’s second trial to a range of damaging things, all of which turned out to be untrue. In fact, by the time of the Inquiry, some of the witnesses had realized and admitted that the evidence they had given was wrong. Commissioner Kaufman found that there were several problems with these witnesses’ “late-breaking revelations.” First, this type of “consciousness of guilt” evidence – i.e., evidence that is meant to show that the accused felt guilty or was otherwise displaying inappropriate emotions – is in general of very little value. Second, some witnesses actively decided to change their testimony in order to help convict Guy, since they strongly believed that he was guilty. These witnesses were influenced by the police and prosecutorial tunnel vision discussed above, and by the understandable but pernicious need to believe that the man who had committed this terrible crime would indeed be brought to justice. It is a sad irony – and a common one in wrongful conviction cases – that the miscarriage of justice that Guy suffered may have ensured that the real killer will never be caught.[23]

The third reason for the unreliability of these witnesses’ testimony is simply that human memory is far more malleable than most people realize. In the words of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, one of the leading experts on human memory, people are “particularly prone to having their memories be affected by misinformation when it is introduced after the passage of time has allowed the original event memory to fade.”[24] Commissioner Kaufman caustically noted that “it is truly remarkable the extent to which the memories of a number of Crown witnesses improved as the proceedings progressed” and that some of this “improvement” was “a product of an interviewing process … that was not designed to create unreliable evidence, but which nonetheless had that very effect.” For example, prior to Ms. Hester’s informing the police that Guy had chased her away from his car, the police had actually told her about the forensic evidence that had been found there, and that they believed that Guy was indeed guilty.

Causes of Guy’s Wrongful Conviction: Reliance on Jailhouse Informants

Another cause of this miscarriage of justice was the false testimony of the jailhouse informants, Mr. May and Mr. X, who claimed that while he was incarcerated, Guy had confessed to killing Christine. Unlike the witnesses described above – who believed that they were telling the truth, and/or that they were helping to put a heinous criminal away – these informants deliberately lied, simply to further their own interests. Both Mr. May and Mr. X. had lengthy criminal records, and had made offers to implicate other inmates in addition to Guy. Moreover, Mr. May was diagnosed as a pathological liar by experts at Guy’s second trial and he went on to tell several people that he had committed perjury at both trials. Mr. X had been diagnosed as having a personality disorder with sociopathic tendencies, including suggestibility and a propensity to lie.

Jailhouse informants have contributed to many wrongful convictions. According to statistics compiled by the Innocence Project at the Cardozo Law School in New York:

In more than 15% of wrongful conviction cases overturned through DNA testing, an informant testified against the defendant at the original trial. Often, statements from people with incentives to testify – particularly incentives that are not disclosed to the jury – are the central evidence in convicting an innocent person.

Given the alarming unreliability of jailhouse informers’ testimony, Commissioner Kaufman concluded that the prosecutorial policy at the time did not adequately take into account the dangers of using this type of evidence. He noted that most jailhouse informants “wish to benefit for their contemplated participation as witnesses for the prosecution,” and that the use of these informants in criminal proceedings should therefore be “significantly limit[ed]” in order to avoid further miscarriages of justice.

Today, Crown Prosecutors are required to view jailhouse informers’ purported evidence in a much more skeptical and vigilant light. For example, the Ontario Crown Policy Manual states that jailhouse informants’ evidence “requires a rigorous, objective assessment of the informer’s account of the accused person’s alleged statement, the circumstances in which that account was provided to the authorities and the in-custody informer’s general reliability.” The Manual notes that “a principal purpose of this policy is to help prevent miscarriages of justice, which can occur when in-custody informers falsely implicate accused persons” – as did the two jailhouse informants in Guy’s case. 

Wounds that Innocence Canada Cannot Heal

Guy spent 10 years of his life – and 18 months in prison – living with the stigma of a horrifying crime: the sexual assault and murder of a nine-year-old girl. As Commissioner Kaufman phrased it:

The criminal proceedings against Guy Paul Morin represent a tragedy not only for Mr. Morin and his family, but also for the community at large: the system failed him – a system for which we, the community, must bear responsibility. An innocent man was arrested, stigmatized, imprisoned and convicted. The real killer has never been found. The trail grows colder with each passing year. For Christine Jessop’s family there is no closure. (PUBLISHER'S NOTE: No longer true, thank goodness.  (See last entry on chronology): HL); Although nothing can restore to Guy the years of his life and the peace of mind that were taken from him, he received $1.25 million and a public apology in compensation for his wrongful conviction. Despite this miscarriage of justice, Guy has been able to get married, raise children, produce a CD of his clarinet music, and develop his skills as a repairperson. As the years go by, however, it becomes less and less likely that Christine’s real killer will ever be caught and that this little girl and her family will ever get the justice they deserve."

----------------------------------------------------------------

READING MATERIALS:

Innocence Canada entry on Guy Paul Morin:

Robson Hall Blog:

Toronto Star story on Toronto Police Service announcement  on on-going investigation linking Calvin Hoover to Christine Jessop's death.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRONOLOGY: October 3, 1984 
Christine Jessop disappears

December 31, 1984
Christine Jessop's body was found 56 kilometers from her house in a farmers field 

January 7, 1985
Christine Jessop's funeral , which Guy Paul did not attend 
April 22, 1985
Guy Paul Morin was charged with first degree murder     

February 7, 1986
Morin was acquitted           

June 5, 1987
Ontario court of appeal orders a new trial  

November 17, 1988    
Supreme court agrees with the Ontario court of appeal

July 30, 1992
Morin is convicted of first degree murder

January 23, 1995
Conviction got over turned by Ontario court of appeal
DNA testing excluded Morin as the killer

September 3, 1996
Morin's public inquiry into wrongful conviction starts

January 24, 1997
Ontario government awards Morin $1.25million 

February 10, 1998 
Final summations conclude in inquiry

October 15, 2020

Toronto Police Service announces that an an-ongoing investigation by The Toronto Police Service had established, through ancestral  DNA evidence,  that Christine Jessop's  real killer was a man  named Calvin Hoover, who had subsequently killed himself.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------