Goudge Inquiry: Sharon's case; Part Seven; Police And Pathologists And "Dirt";

FROM SHARON'S MOTHER'S PRELIMINARY HEARING:

Q: (TO DOCTOR SMITH): DOCTOR BEFORE YOU DID THIS AUTOPSY HOW MANY OTHER CASES HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN WHERE A DOG HAS BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WOUNDS?;

A: "I'VE SEEN DOG WOUNDS. I'VE SEEN COYOTE WOUNDS. I'VE SEEN WOLF WOUNDS.

I RECENTLY WENT TO AN ARCHIPELAGO OF ISLANDS OWNED BY ANOTHER COUNTRY NEAR THE NORTH POLE AND HAD OCCASION TO STUDY OSTEOLOGY AND LOOK AT PATTERNS OF KILLING FROM POLAR BEARS.

AS ABSURD AS IT IS TO THINK THAT A POLAR NEAR ATTACKED SHARON, SO IT IS EQUALLY ABSURD THAT IT'S A DOG WOUND...

SO IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT A DOG INTERFERED WITH THIS BODY BUT I DO NOT SEE ON SHARON'S BODY ANY MARKS THAT I WOULD SAY ARE TYPICAL OF CANINE ACTIVITY";
------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the systemic issues the Inquiry must deal with is the relationship between police officers and pathologists in our adversarial system of criminal justice.

Is it permissible, for example, for police officers assisting to Crown to provide "dirt" on the pathologists who are assisting the defence so that prosecutors will be able to decimate their evidence at trial.

The issue is squarely raised in Sharon's case by a police officers notes of a meeting on September 18, 2000, between Detective Kennedy and Prosecutor Ed Bradley on one hand and Doctors Charles Smith and Robert Wood who had provided the opinions that Sharon had died from stab wounds.

According to the Overview Report on Sharon's case, Detective Kennedy's notes of the meeting were recorded as follows:

Headless dog study
skull/weapon artifact study;

Ferris - (Defence expert H.L.) - not allowed to do autopsies in B.C.

Dorion (Defence expert Robert Dorion - ondontologist H.L.) never published a scientific artifact

Michael Pollanen - 26 Grenville has discredited Ferris before trial

Dorion - Saskatchewan trial - Milgard (sic) case for defence had first scene case morning he flew in had agreed to take same day before

Fatal attack of woman (and) child - Labrador 1 1/2 years ago Public Inquiry - boy 7 years...

Dirt on Dorion (and) Ferris -

-Commit to a theory (and) stick to it...

NO Comments in their report based on info from us -
Base comment on their observation of photos (and) personal knowledge re post-mortem

-IE Foot prints - ingestion by dog

"The wound as described by Smith - no way caused by dog

-be definitive re wounds

-Blenkensop didn't make the wounds

(Smith will stand by his cause of death re deep wound)The Overview Report also tells us that in or around June 2000, Dr. Wood sent an email to David Sweet of the Bureau for Legal Dentistry which underlined the importance of the systemic issue.

"Dear David,..." The letter begins.

"Can you give me the name of the Crown from Saskatoon who invigilated (sic) Dorion this year?

If you can also cite the case that would be a big help.

I've received some information from Stan Kogan about a case Bob did ages ago in Northern Quebec which has come under some sort of judicial review.

It seems that Bob may have cooked some data.

The Crown and the cops in Kingston have asked me to so a hatchet job on Dorion so any help you can offer (in extreme confidence) would be most helpful."

The Overview Report also notes that, "On June 5, 2000, Mr. Sweet responded to Dr. Wood's email, providing him the name of the case in Saskatoon and the name and contact information of the Crown counsel. Mr. Sweet asked "Bob," *please* keep me informed of your progress. I love this!"

Harold Levy; hlevy15@gmail.com;