Saturday, February 16, 2013

Megan Martzen: Report on mistrial probes meaning of jury's verdict. CBS47TV.

PUBLISHER'S VIEW: (Editorial); It would appear from reading media accounts of the trial that the jurors did not accept the evidence of the expert  medical witnesses called by the prosecution in a bid to prove that Megan Martzen intentionally harmed  17-month-old Ella. As Defence lawyer Jeff Hammerschmidt put it: "It can not and will not ever be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, it's also very clear that 8 of the jurors believed that Megan did not intentionally cause any harm to Ella)." Instead,  the jurors looked beyond the medical evidence provided by the experts to consider all of the facts of the case, including Megan Martzen's explanation as to what occurred, and the various points raising reasonable doubt which were brought out by her defence lawyer.  As one reporter put it, by the end of the trial the jury had largely  become Megan Martzen's "support group." The question now is the extent to which the prosecutors will go in their bid to put Megan Martzen behind bars for life. Will they put their medical experts back in the witness box in the hope that maybe they can persuade another group of medical experts to accept their opinions? Will the prosecutors redouble their efforts to get this young woman in fear of  being put in prison for life to  contradict herself under the pressure of being on the witness stand so they can argue to the jury that she is lying?  If the prosecutors  lose the next trial  to a mistrial but win over one or two more jurors, will they keep going until they succeed in putting her behind bars as the child's killer? The panel of jurors acted judicially by doing their difficult job in the courtroom as their oath requires. The prosecutors should act judicially too in the circumstances by drawing a curtain on this tragic case.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

STORY: "Mistrial on Megan Martzen murder case," by reporter Diane Tuazon, published by  CBS47TV on February 12, 2013.

GIST: "Through it all her family stood by her, supporting Martzen every difficult step of the way.
"It is encouraging to see how many believe in her and to see the public as well come behind us and support Megan," said April Roque, Megan's mother. The judge declared Martzen's case a mistrial after the jury deliberated for hours and came to the conclusion that they just could not come to an agreement on a verdict. Martzen's attorney says the jury spoke loud and clear. "It can not and will not ever be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, it's also very clear that 8 of the jurors believed that Megan did not intentionally cause any harm to (Ella) ," Jeff Hammerschmidt said. A few of the jurors spoke up about their support for Megan Martzen and how they truly believe she is innoncent. "The truth will set you free, she's going to be fine," said one juror. "When you really get down to it, there was no proof," said another juror......... The prosecution's reaction is what's disappointing to Martzen's mother. "Disappointed that the DA for suggesting to continue, they can see how favorable it is for Megan," Roque said. No matter what lies ahead, the Martzen's family says they will face what tommorow brings together as a family. "We will respect what they do, and we will keep pushing forward," Roque said."

The entire story can be found at:


I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.

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 found at:

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to:

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.