"THIS REMAINS A SENSITIVE POLITICAL FILE. THAT WOULD SEEM TO BE THE ONLY REASON WHY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD SEEK TO SETTLE THIS QUIETLY. IT WOULD ALSO SEEM TO BE THE REASON THAT THE ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE SEEM UNWILLING TO EITHER APOLOGIZE TO TRUSCOTT, COMMENT ON WHAT WORK IT EVER DID ON OTHER SUSPECTS, OR ADMIT THAT IT BOTCHED THIS INVESTIGATION."
EDITORIAL: THE GUELPH MERCURY;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: The Steven Truscott case is one of the most horrifying miscarriages of justice in Canadian history;
By way of brief Wikipedia introduction for those unfamiliar with the case - in which the fact that the pathologist who conducted the autopsy had changed his opinion as to the time of death was not disclosed to the defence:
"Steven Murray Truscott (born January 18, 1945 in Vancouver, British Columbia) is a Canadian man who was sentenced to death in 1959, when he was a 14-year old student, for the alleged murder of classmate Lynne Harper. His death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, and he continued to maintain his innocence until 2007, when his conviction was declared a miscarriage of justice and he was formally acquitted of the crime.
On July 7, 2008, the government of Ontario awarded him $6.50 million in compensation.[1]
Truscott was scheduled to be hanged on December 8, 1959; however, a temporary reprieve on November 20, 1959 postponed his execution to February 16, 1960 to allow for an appeal. On January 22, 1960, his death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment.
Truscott was the youngest person to be sentenced to death in Canada, and his case gave major impetus toward the abolition of the death penalty in Canada.
On November 29, 2001, Truscott filed a section 690 Criminal Code application for a review of his 1959 murder conviction. Hearings in a review of the Truscott case were heard at the Ontario Court of Appeal.
On August 28, 2007, after review of nearly 250 fresh pieces of evidence, the court declared that Truscott's conviction had been a miscarriage of justice. As he was not declared factually innocent, a new trial could have been ordered, but this was a practical impossibility given the passage of time. Accordingly, the court acquitted Truscott of the murder."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Guelph Mercury raises this question today in an editorial which runs under the heading: "Payout to Truscott was oddly handled";
"The federal government should be commended for paying half of the compensation award issued to Steven Truscott over his wrongful 1959 murder conviction and the woeful odyssey that flowed from it," the editorial begins;
"It's disappointing, however, that it took Ottawa as long as it did to provide its financial share on this matter -- regardless of the fact that it didn't result in a delay in the funds paid to Truscott," the editorial continues;
"Shameful is that this step also came without bringing public attention to it. In being done covertly, it happened without the federal government formally taking responsibility for its role in this miscarriage of justice and in Truscott's profound suffering as a result.
Ottawa owns a measure of this sorry case. It also owes an apology to Truscott, his family, and to the relatives of Lynne Harper -- the 12-year-old Clinton girl he was so long alleged to have murdered.
This remains a sensitive political file. That would seem to be the only reason why the federal government would seek to settle this quietly. It would also seem to be the reason that the Ontario Provincial Police seem unwilling to either apologize to Truscott, comment on what work it ever did on other suspects, or admit that it botched this investigation.
Retired Ontario judge Sydney Robins studied the Truscott case for the province and the issue of compensating him prior to the province doing so -- for the $6.5 million Robins recommended.
His 57-page report is a thorough and powerful commentary on the justice system failures in the case, provincially and federally. It also shed light on harm caused to Truscott through that process that had only been previously hinted at.
It also liberally employed "innocent" as a word that should be applied to Truscott.
A year ago this week, the province made public it agreed with Robins and needed to compensate Truscott. It did so prominently and publicly.
It's startling the federal government opted for a quieter course."
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
