Thursday, February 20, 2014

Bulletin: Ajitpal Singh Sekhon; Supreme Court of Canada tells prosecutors that expert witnesses, including police officers, must not give opinions based on their experience. Law prof says the ruling is part of a trend since Ontario's 2008 Goudge inquiry into more than a dozen wrongful convictions in baby deaths, stemming from the testimony of disgraced Toronto pathologist Charles Smith. Justice Writer Sean Fine. The Globe and Mail. (Link to decision provided);


STORY: "Supreme Court halts use of expert opinions," by Justice Writer Sean Fine, published by the Globe and Mail on February 20, 2014.

GIST:  "The Supreme Court of Canada has told the country’s prosecutors that expert witnesses, including police officers, must not give opinions based on their experience. The ruling, in a major drug case, has wide implications for the prosecution of serious crimes, from high-value theft to murder, in which experts are called on to draw inferences or analyze evidence before the court. Such testimony has been linked to wrongful convictions, and the court was unanimous in trying to call a halt to opinion it feels has been disguised as fact.........The court went so far as to mock the expert testimony of an RCMP officer in a case in which a man accused of being a drug courier, Ajitpal Singh Sekhon, said he hadn’t been aware that 50 kilograms of cocaine were hidden in the truck he was trying to drive into British Columbia from Washington State. The Mountie had testified that in the 1,000 cases he had been involved in, he had never personally found a single one that involved a “blind” courier – someone kept in the dark about what he was transporting. That testimony, wrote Justice Michael Moldaver, is no different from a “stolen goods investigator testifying that he or she has never seen a case of innocent possession of stolen property, or an experienced fraud investigator testifying that he or she has never seen a case where a senior manager was not aware of fraudulent conduct occurring within the company. The inherent danger of admitting such evidence is obvious.”.........Ben Berger, a criminal-law specialist at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto, said the ruling is an attempt by the court to rein in expert witnesses, part of a trend since Ontario’s 2008 Goudge inquiry into more than a dozen wrongful convictions in baby deaths, stemming from the testimony of disgraced Toronto pathologist Charles Smith. The Supreme Court found that “police experience on its own is something that has to be looked at with suspicion and a critical eye,” Prof. Berger said. “That’s important not just in a drug setting but in pretty much any criminal investigatory setting.”"

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/supreme-court-deals-blow-to-prosecution-of-drug-offences/article16995191/

See Vancouver Sun story: "In a 5-2 decision, the Supreme Court says part of the policeman's testimony was inadmissible, but that the rest of the evidence in the case was overwhelming. Writing for the majority, Justice Michael Moldaver says the inadmissible evidence was a small part of the evidence against Sekhon, while the two dissenting justices called it a major error to have allowed it."

 http://www.vancouversun.com/mobile/news/vancouver/Supreme+Court+upholds+2011+conviction+smuggling+cocaine/9530112/story.html

The Supreme Court of Canada decision  can be found at:

http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/13486/index.do

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.
 
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.