"THIS WEEK'S ACQUITTAL IS ONE THING AND, BY SHERRET-ROBINSON'S OWN ADMISSION, IT MEANS A LOT, BUT SOMEHOW, GIVEN THE VICIOUSNESS AND THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT DOCTOR'S CAVALIER TESTIMONY, ONE FEELS THAT IT FALLS WELL SHORT OF WHAT COULD BE CONSIDERED FAIR AND REASONABLE."
JOHN KASTNER; THE TORONTO SUN;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: An overview of Joshua's case prepared by Commission staff indicates that:
Joshua was born in Belleville, Ontario on September 23, 1995 to Sherry Lee-Ann Sherret and Peter. Joshua had an older half-brother born on July 4, 1994 to Sherry and another partner. Sherry, Peter, Joshua and Joshua's bother all resided together in Trenton, Ontario. Joshua died on January 23, 1996, at the age of four months in Trenton,Ontario.
At the time of Joshua's death Sherry was 20 years old. On March 27, 1996, sherry was charged with first-degree murder in Joshua's death. After a preliminary inquiry she was committed to stand trial on that charge. However, that committal was subsequently quashed and she was ordered to stand trial on a charge of second-degree murder instead.
On January 4, 1999, a new indictment charging infanticide was placed before the Ontario Court of Justice (General Division). Sherry entered a plea of not guilty. However, the Crown then read into the record certain agreed facts. The defence called no evidence in response to the facts read in and did not dispute them. As a result sherry was convicted of infanticide. On June 2, 1999, she was sentenced to a one-year custodial term followed by two years of probation. Just prior to the laying of the criminal charge, on March 7, 1996, Joshua's brother was apprehended by the Northumberland Children's Aid Society and placed in foster care. He was ultimately adopted by his foster family. In September, 2005, Sherry had another child, a daughter. The Children's Aid Society obtained a Supervision Order in October, 2006, in relation to this child. On April 11, 2007, that order was terminated. The conviction was quashed and she was acquitted by the Ontario Court of Appeal on December 7, 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is no relationship greater than that between mother and child, so one can hardly imagine the anguish that exists in the heart of a mother who has to bury her infant," John Kastner's Toronto Sun column begins under the heading "Sherret-Robinson case a miscarriage of justice."
"Accusing the mother of being responsible for that death, when she was not, is unspeakable cruelty," the column continues.
"When those allegations come from a respected member of the medical community it is beyond challenge and reproach and an innocent person who is already grieving the death of her child is left to swing in the wind.
It is hard to imagine a scenario that could be any more inhumane, but there's more.
The grieving mother is sent to trial and wrongfully convicted of a crime she did not commit based on the flawed and, one might even say, spiteful testimony of a doctor. She is then sentenced to prison.
And if that is not enough the mother had another child taken away, a child she has never seen again.
This callous scenario unfolded 10 years ago and it was only this week that Sherry Sherret-Robinson has the backing of the courts when she tells people she does not deserve to be called a baby killer.
Sherret-Robinson has been saying that for 10 years, ever since the death of her four-month-old baby, Joshua. But she was sent to jail largely because of false testimony from pathologist Dr. Charles Smith, then considered to be one of the top doctors in that field and a very helpful witness for Crown attorneys.
But the man considered to be an expert is now an ashamed and disgraced person who is being held responsible not only for sending Sherret-Robinson to jail for a year, but others as well.
This week's acquittal is one thing and, by Sherret-Robinson's own admission, it means a lot, but somehow, given the viciousness and the ramifications of that doctor's cavalier testimony, one feels that it falls well short of what could be considered fair and reasonable.
Given the litigous nature of our society, it seems odd, almost refreshing, that Sherret-Robinson does not plan to sue or write a book, but one is still left with the feeling that something else should happen.
She has lost 10 years of her life and another child, she had to fight the heinous of all allegations, that she had killed her child."
The column can be found at:
http://www.timminspress.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2213287
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
