Compensation For Dr. Charles Smith's Victims and Their Families: Wise Advice to Premier McGuinty;

WHEN THE REPORT IS DELIVERED, MCGUINTY SHOULD HAVE A RESPONSE PREPARED. LET'S NOT SEE THIS DEGENERATE FURTHER INTO A PROTRACTED BATTLE FOR COMPENSATION THAT DEEPENS THE TRAGEDIES STILL AT PLAY. VICTIMS SHOULD GET COMPENSATION WHILE THEY CAN STILL REBUILD THEIR LIVES.

COLUMNIST ROBERT HOWARD: HAMILTON SPECTATOR;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Government lawyers have made it very clear in their closing submissions that they don't want Commissioner Stephen Goudge making any recommendations related to compensation of Dr. Smith's victims and their families;

But as Robert Howard writes in a column published in the Hamilton Spectator under the headline "Compensate Smith Victims" on April 5, 2008, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty should not waste any time addressing compensation after Justice has delivered his report on September 30th;

"Through self-admitted professional incompetence, Dr. Charles Smith destroyed lives -- leaving relationships, reputations and finances in tatters in many cases, unjust criminal convictions in others," the column begins;

"His employer at the time -- the province of Ontario -- has to start thinking now about how to try to make up for that," it continues;

"Premier Dalton McGuinty says his government will wait until the fall before considering whether to compensate innocent people accused of killing children in cases handled by the once-revered pathologist.

McGuinty admits to a government "obligation" to consider compensation but only after it receives the final report of Justice Stephen Goudge's inquiry into Smith's trail of errors and broken lives.

While Queen's Park is obligated to safeguard the interests of taxpayers, the premier and his cabinet need to start thinking now, not later, about how (not whether) it will compensate Smith's victims.

Sadly, Canada is rife with precedent and models for compensation for unjust convictions.

What's a wrongful murder conviction worth these days?

Ask Donald Marshall, Guy Paul Morin and David Milgaard, all exonerated after conviction by new evidence.

There's no debating Smith's culpability.

He admitted to it at the inquiry.

It was the province of Ontario that employed him, promoted him and made him virtually unchallengeable in court.

Of course, the province will compensate his victims.

McGuinty knows it, lawyers know it, and there can hardly be a taxpayer in Ontario who doesn't know it.

Consider the case, reported in yesterday's Spectator, of the 12-year-old girl charged with manslaughter in 1988 because of an erroneous conclusion by Smith.

Referred to in inquiry documents only as SM, she was accused of killing the 16-month-old daughter of a neighbour.

To prove Smith wrong -- he had overruled earlier findings that the death was accidental -- the girl's family spent all their savings and sold their house to find and bring in experts who could show a judge that the girl was, indeed and indisputably, not guilty.

That girl (now a 32-year-old woman with a successful career) and her family are just some of the victims in at least 20 cases botched by Smith.

Smith's highest-profile victims are those who went to prison.

But there are many others, including those such as SM who were found not guilty but had their lives shattered; and those, such as SM's family, who were part of the "collateral damage" of this horrifying affair.

When the report is delivered, McGuinty should have a response prepared.

Let's not see this degenerate further into a protracted battle for compensation that deepens the tragedies still at play.

Victims should get compensation while they can still rebuild their lives.

Reasonable taxpayers will certainly see the justice in fair, appropriate and timely compensation for those whose lives were ruined by the ineptitude of a star civil servant."

A point well made;

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;