WHY WAS ANNA SOKOTNYUK AND HER FAMILY PUT THROUGH THIS ORDEAL? SHE AND THE PUBLIC DESERVE ANSWERS;

THE ARREST CAME AFTER POLICE RECEIVED A NEW, DETAILED REPORT FROM THE CORONER'S OFFICE REGARDING HEAD INJURIES SUSTAINED BY THE INFANT, SAID ACTING STAFF INSP. BRIAN RAYBOULD.

HOMICIDE DETECTIVES HAVE BEEN LOOKING INTO THE CASE FOR 10 MONTHS, AFTER A FEBRUARY AUTOPSY REVEALED THE BABY DIED FROM INJURIES THAT LIKELY OCCURRED WHEN SHE WAS SHAKEN OR SPUN.

RAYBOULD SAID THE REASON THE ARREST TOOK SO LONG IS BECAUSE "THE CORONER'S OFFICE WANTS TO ENSURE ALL OF THESE CASES ARE THOROUGHLY AND METICULOUSLY INVESTIGATED."

REPORTER JESSICA LEEDER: TORONTO STAR;

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

I have devoted two recent postings to the case of Anna Sokotnyuk who faced a second-degree murder charge - in connection with the death of her three-month- old daughter - until it was dropped by prosecutors last week because of their concerns with the pathology evidence.

Knowing, as we now, that there was no sound basis on which to lay the charge, it is most instructive to look at the information relayed to the public about the case as evidenced by a December, 2, 2005 story on her arrest published by the Toronto Star, under the heading "Mother charged in death of her baby girl."

"A 24-year-old woman whose infant daughter died in February has been charged with second-degree murder in the baby's death, after police conducted a 10-month long investigation," the story by reporter Paul Choi begins.

"On Jan. 26, police responded to a 14-storey apartment at Jane St. and Steeles Ave. W. after receiving a 911 call about an infant who had stopped breathing," the story continues.

Police say the 3-month-old girl, named Anastasia, was taken to Humber River Regional Hospital's Finch site and later the Hospital for Sick Children.

She died a few days later, on Feb. 1.

An examination determined the infant had suffered a severe brain injury.

Shortly after, the homicide squad, along with two officers from 31 Division, began investigating the circumstances surrounding the child's death.

Yesterday, police said the child's mother, Anna Sokotnyuk of Toronto, had been arrested and charged with second-degree murder.

Police say the investigation is continuing.

Neighbours said the 24-year-old woman had been living at the apartment with her husband for about a year.

They said she moved out about a month after the baby died.

Sokotnyuk is expected to appear this morning at College Park courts.

This is the city's 73rd homicide of the year."

Ms. Sokotnyuk would later find herself on Metropolitan Toronto's list of homicides which occurred in 1995 - among some of the most brutal homicides imaginable.

Indeed, she was labelled with "homicide number 73" in a National Post story y reporter Kelly Patrick, published on Saturday, January 14, 2006, under the heading "Snapshots of a deadly year," (2005) and the sub-heading, Toronto recorded 78 murders last year, a record 52 of which were by the bullet."

"Today marks the one-year anniversary of Toronto's first murder of 2005, a deadly 12-month stretch that came to be known as the year of the gun," the story began.

The year did not start out that way.

Thanushan Jeyakumaran, the 18-year-old slain last Jan. 14, was stabbed, not shot.

But his death marked the beginning of a year in which violence claimed 78 lives, the most since Toronto recorded 88 homicides in 1991.

Of the murdered, a record 52 were shot, 12 were stabbed, seven were beaten, two were bludgeoned, two were strangled and one drowned.

Two others, a baby girl and an elderly woman, died of other causes...."

The entry relating to Ms. Sokotnyuk ran as follows: "73. On Dec. 1, after a 10-month investigation, pathologists determined three-month-old Anastasia Sokotnyuk had been shaken to death. Police deemed her Feb. 1 death a homicide. Charged is the baby's mother, Anna Sokotnyuk, 24."

The agony Ms. Sokotnyuk and her husband were put through becomes apparent in a story by reporter Jessica Leeder, which appeared in the Toronto Star on December 3, 2005, under the heading, "Husband can't visit wife in jail."

The story was accompanied by a courtroom artist's representation of Sokotnyuk bearing the caption, "Anna Sokotnyuk was in court for a bail hearing yesterday."

"The husband of a mother charged with killing their baby daughter says he has been blocked from visiting his wife since her arrest this week," the story began.

"Artem Sokotnyuk said yesterday he's angry he hasn't been able to visit his wife, Anna, 24, who has been in jail since she was arrested Wednesday and charged with killing her three-month-old daughter," it continued.

The arrest came after police received a new, detailed report from the coroner's office regarding head injuries sustained by the infant, said Acting Staff Insp. Brian Raybould.

Homicide detectives have been looking into the case for 10 months, after a February autopsy revealed the baby died from injuries that likely occurred when she was shaken or spun.

Raybould said the reason the arrest took so long is because "the coroner's office wants to ensure all of these cases are thoroughly and meticulously investigated."

A police spokesperson said it is customary for visitation rights of the recently arrested to be restricted.

Artem Sokotnyuk said he was caught off guard by the arrest.

"I hate these kinds of surprises," he said yesterday
during a brief interview.

Police began investigating the woman, a designer at the Russian Express Weekly newspaper, after she called 911 on Jan. 26 because her daughter had stopped breathing.

Artem Sokotnyuk was not present during his wife's brief appearance at a bail hearing yesterday.

Looking tired and dishevelled in a white winter coat, Anna remained expressionless when told she would remain in custody until Dec. 6, when she'll have another chance to post bail."

We learn from the Homicide detective that, "the arrest took so long is because "the coroner's office wants to ensure all of these cases are thoroughly and meticulously investigated."

This quote would certainly give the public an impression that the charge must be warranted because of the intensive ten month examination conducted by the Chief Coroner's Office.

However, we know now, that the Coroner's office got it wrong in 2005 - after the Office was well aware of the dangers of forensic pediatric pathology evidence for years because of the Charles Smith debacle.

Ms. Sokotnyuk and the public deserve some answers.

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;