In a recent post on Dr. Colin Manock - the self-styled forensic 'expert' who was not qualified to do death investigations and was responsible for Henry Keogh's wrongful conviction, and who knows how many others, I raised the question 'what kind of man would allow himself to play such a destructive, harmful role in his state's criminal justice system?' The post can be accessed at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2016/07/henry-keogh-part-six-dr-colin-manock-so.html.
The post was based upon a two part documentary report by Graham Archer on 'todaytonight Adelaide' which appeared on March 21, 2016 which I noted goes a long way to answering this fundamental question. (Part One takes us to the tiny opal mining South Australian settlement of Mintabie in 1978 where Manock performs an outdoor autopsy on an aboriginal man - even though private, in-door cool-room facilities are available, In the words of reporter Graham Archer: "His plan is to demonstrate his mortuary skills before the entire community. Miners, Aboriginal people, women and perhaps even children congregate around in stunned belief. He then goes to work on the body of the deceased - someone's father - someone's brother - someone's son." Mulla Sumner, an Aboriginal elder interjects: "Well, my sort of response to that, and what I can see is that he gutted this bloke in public, he gutted him took out his insides. Graham Archer responds: "That's what happens in autopsies. The skull is cut open, the brain removed as are the organs of the body. The bystanders, especially the Aboriginal people, must have been horrified at this indignity - the desecration of the poor man in public.") Following through on this "what kind of man theme, I am beginning a series in which I will republish posts published over the past seven years which shed light on the same question, when posed with respect to another forensic fraud who destroyed the lives of innocent people through the perverse role he played in the criminal justice system - who, in a public inquiry admitted his lack of qualifications to determine crucial matters such as the cause of death - disgraced pathologist Charles Randal Smith, the namesake of this Blog. Todays focus: What kind of man - a senior official in the province's forensic pediatric establishment - during a confrontation with an Ontario Provincial Police Officer after being pulled over at night for speeding makes a big deal about how important he was - and threatens to cut off his office's services to dead children in the area if she persists in giving him the ticket?
Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
-----------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Goudge Inquiry: The OPP (Ontario Provincial Police) Letter: Part One: ( Unabridged);
The letter, dated 18 November, 2002, is on the letterhead of the Northumberland OPP - Cobourg detachment.
It is addressed to Chief Coroner Dr. James Young and signed by Inspector J.J. (Jim) Szarka, Inspector and Detachment Commander.
I am running the letter in its entirety without editorial comment for the benefit of the readers of this Blog. (My comments will follow in a later posting);
"Dear Dr. Young.
An officer from my detachment has contacted me about the circumstances of a traffic stop that I feel you should be aware of.
The stop took place on the 401 Highway near Percy Street in Cramahe Township on the 9th of November, 2002. Constable Nancy Wagner advised the driver she had clocked him at 136 km/hr and asked if he had a reason for traveling at that speed. He indicated "I was passing". There was one other occupant in the passenger seat, being an 18-20 year old male. The officer showed some discretion and issued the driver a ticket for 115 km/hr which would result in no demerit points (instead of 4) and approximately $200.00 less of a fine.
The driver got angry and said "did you not see my license plate?" The officer said "Yes sir". He then said "Do you know who I am, I am the head of Pediatric Forensic Pathology for this province." He asked "What office do you work out of?" The officer responded "Northumberland OPP, Cobourg office."
He then said "Next time Cobourg needs forensics on a child they won't get one from our office."
The officer asked "So you are denying Cobourg your services because you got a speeding ticket?" He then responded "Yes." The officer clarified "You are going to risk an investigation for a family and child because you got a speeding ticket?" He again motioned with a head nod up and down. The officer advised the motorist she would be speaking to her Inspector about the matter and he quickly drove off.
Constable Wagner was obviously very concerned by the statements made to her. I do not think I need to comment further about the seriousness of this matter.
I look forward to hearing from you in relation to this issue.
Signed. J. Szarka;
