"Hay’s trial lawyer, Jeff House, argued at trial that Hay was at home asleep at the time of the murder.
Hay’s appeal lawyers, James Lockyer and Philip Campbell, have asked the Supreme Court to allow them to send hairs for forensic testing that they hope will free Hay from prison after more than seven years in custody.
The hair was not forensically tested for the original trial.
Hay’s lawyers have argued that the conviction was based on the unconfirmed evidence of an eyewitness.
Hay is serving a life term for first-degree murder.
The Crown argued that Hay shaved his head shortly after the murder to thwart eyewitnesses. Hair clippings, wrapped in a newspaper, were discovered by police in Hay’s home.
But Hay’s lawyers told the top court that the short hair clippings were likely facial hairs and not from his head."
REPORTER PETER EDWARDS: THE TORONTO STAR;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND: Lawyers for Leighton Hay are asking the Supreme Court of Canada to allow them to send hairs for forensic testing that they hope will free Hay from prison after more than seven years in custody. Hay is serving a life term in the July 2002 execution-style murder of Colin Moore, 51, a beloved member of the local Guyanese community. Hay’s trial lawyer, Jeff House, argued Hay was at home asleep at the time of the shootings. The Crown accused Hay of shaving his head immediately after Moore’s murder to confuse eyewitnesses, and noted that a police search of his residence turned up hair clippings wrapped in newspaper. Now, Hay’s appeal lawyers, James Lockyer and Philip Campbell, have applied to the Supreme Court to have the clippings filed as exhibits in his trial tested at the Centre for Forensic Sciences. They argue the hairs are not from his head, but likely facial hair. Crown counsel Susan Reid opposes release of the hair, saying that even if it was proven to be facial hair, it still would not prove Hay didn’t shave his head immediately after the murder. “This can have no impact on the unassailable fact that the appellant’s head was shaved on arrest,” Reid wrote the court. “Consequently, any scientific test results have no impact on the verdict.” Neither the prosecution nor the defence sought to have the hairs tested at the original trial. Anthony Tessarolo, director of the Centre of Forensic Sciences, has told Hay’s lawyers that testing could determine whether the hairs were from a subject’s head or face. “It is possible through microscopic examination to determine the body area of origin of a hair sample,” Tessarolo said. Moore was fatally shot by gatecrashers while hosting a Guyanese charity dance at the HHMS Bar on Victoria Park Ave. by two men who were ejected from the event 15 minutes earlier. The killers hunted down Moore and shot him point blank. Hay, then 19, of Malton and Gary Eunick, then 27, a Toronto hairstylist, were each convicted of first-degree murder. Eunick was the boyfriend of Hay’s sister. Moore’s brother, Colin, was also shot that evening, but survived. Bloody clothing with gunshot residue and bullets inside a sock buried in a clothing hamper were among evidence presented in court. In March, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled Hay and Eunick received fair trials and dismissed an appeal to have their convictions overturned.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Supreme Court of Canada will decide whether a few strands of hair is enough to reopen one of the Greater Toronto Area’s most notorious murder cases in the past decade," the Toronto Star story by reporter Peter Edwards published earlier today begins, under the heading, "Top court considers reopening murder conviction: Conviction in notorious slaying may be hanging by a hair."
"Canada’s top court has agreed with lawyers representing Leighton Hay to grant a rare oral hearing to challenge his conviction for the July 2002 execution-style murder of Colin Moore, 51, a beloved member of the local Guyanese community. No date has been set for the hearing," the story continues.
"Hay’s trial lawyer, Jeff House, argued at trial that Hay was at home asleep at the time of the murder.
Hay’s appeal lawyers, James Lockyer and Philip Campbell, have asked the Supreme Court to allow them to send hairs for forensic testing that they hope will free Hay from prison after more than seven years in custody.
The hair was not forensically tested for the original trial.
Hay’s lawyers have argued that the conviction was based on the unconfirmed evidence of an eyewitness.
Hay is serving a life term for first-degree murder.
The Crown argued that Hay shaved his head shortly after the murder to thwart eyewitnesses. Hair clippings, wrapped in a newspaper, were discovered by police in Hay’s home.
But Hay’s lawyers told the top court that the short hair clippings were likely facial hairs and not from his head.
The Crown opposed the release of the hairs for scientific testing. Crown attorney Susan Reid argued that even if it was proved to be facial hair, Hay still might have shaved his head immediately after the murder.
Neither the prosecution nor the defence sought to have the hairs tested at the original trial.
Hay’s appeal lawyers quoted from a letter from Anthony Tessarolo, the director of the Centre of Forensic Sciences, which stated that testing could determine whether the hairs were from a subject’s head or face.
Moore was hosting a Guyanese charity dance at the HHMS Bar on Victoria Park Ave., just south of Eglinton Ave. E., when two men crashed the door, hunted him down, and executed him point blank.
Court heard that the killers were men who had been ejected from the event 15 minutes earlier.
Hay was 19 at the time of the murder.
Toronto hairstylist, Gary Eunick, then 27, was also convicted of first-degree murder. Eunuch was the boyfriend of Hay’s sister."
The story can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/crime/article/836449--top-court-considers-reopening-murder-conviction
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2010/07/new-feature-cases-issues-and.html
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
Is The Age of Progressive Prosecutors Over?
10 hours ago
