"ESSENTIALLY THE FRESH EVIDENCE ...DISCREDITS THE EVIDENCE GIVEN AT TRIAL BY DOCTOR CHARLES SMITH."
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA JUSTICE MORRIS FISH;
The Supreme Court of Canada has recognized the havoc caused by Dr. Charles Smith on Canada's criminal justice system.
(The Globe and Mail got it right in an editorial following release of the results of the Chief Coroner's review when it described Dr. Smith as an "earthquake" that struck our justice system over and over again.)
This was the first time that the Supreme Court has delivered a judgment on a case in which Dr. Smith was the issue.
"Essentially the fresh evidence - mainly the expert opinions of Dr. Michael Pollanen and Dr. Simon Avis - discredits the evidence given at trial by Dr. Charles Smith, an expert called by the Crown," Justice Morris Fish wrote for the unanimous court. "And the evidence of a second Crown witness at trial, Dr. David Chan, has been rendered unreliable as a result..."
(The Supreme Court of Canada's description of the once-renowned Crown expert's evidence as "discredited" is akin to a general's epaulettes being pulled off in disgrace by the Commander-in-chief);
"We think it neither safe nor sound to conclude that the verdicts on any charges would necessarily have been the same but for Dr. Smith's successfully impugned evidence."
(Justice Fish explains that the Court cannot provide any more details than necessary about the fresh evidence because it directed a new trial on all counts);
The Trotta decision falls closely on the heels of the Ontario Court of Appeal decision acquitting William Mullins-Johnson in the first-degree murder of his 4-year-old niece Valin Johnson - which we now know to be an alleged crime that never occurred. (See earlier posting: Mullins-Johnson acquittal: Notable quotes);
So now both the Supreme Court of Canada and the Ontario Court of Appeal have closely examined Dr. Smith's work in two cases where he was the central crown witness and found that the Emperor was wearing no clothes.
(For an account of key forensic evidence misplaced by Dr. Smith in the Trotta case, see previous posting (October);Trotta: Another Smith case involving misplaced evidence.)
The toll in the just these two cases:
Mullins-Johnson served more than twelve years of his first-degree sentence before being released from custody pending his application for a ministerial review;
Marco Trotta had served nine years of a life sentence with no chance of parole for fifteen years as his son's killer.
Anisa Trotta had completed serving her five year term for negligent homicide and failure to provide the necessaries of life;
And that's just the cost in terms of years.
All because of the once celebrated Dr. Charles Randal Smith.
Globe and Mail reporter Kirk Makin got it right yesterday in a report published on the Globe's Web-site shortly after the judgment was released:
"Thursday's ruling was a major victory for lawyers James Lockyer and Michael Lomer," wrote Makin.
"They had tried to persuade the court that, by misidentifying or fabricating injuries – and then overstating his evidence at the Trotta trial – Dr. Smith had poisoned the entire proceeding."
"The Supreme Court of Canada has now encapsulated what has become more and more clear in recent years - that Dr. Smith's mistakes have discredited him," Mr. Lomer said in an interview (with Makin).
For Dr. Smith, the light at the end of the tunnel is the train."
The ball is now in the prosecutor's court as they digest the Supreme Court decision as the determine what, if any of the charges, they will bring to trial - now that their prime witness (whose evidence was declared by the Supreme Court to be inter-twined with all of the charges) has been discredited by the Nation's highest court.
Stay tune for developments.
(See other previous Trotta postings:
Trotta: Supreme Court hearing set for October 12; (October);
Trotta: Smith-related case creates dilemma for Supreme Court; (October);)