PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Yesterday I had the pleasure of making a virtual presentation to The Nexus Conference on Wrongful Convictions (2022) - an important international forum which is devoted to bringing representatives of common law jurisdictions, "to discuss common challenges, share success stories, review the latest jurisprudence and advances in forensic science, and collaborate on recommendations for best practices and reform...The NCWC is jointly organized by the UBC Innocence Project, Innocence Canada, Innocence Project London, Griffith University Innocence Project, and The International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy." I had the good fortune of being on a panel containing really bright, experienced participants from whom I learned a great deal. The panel was called, "The role of the media in remedying and uncovering wrongful convictions"...My fellow panelists were: Jon Robins: Editor of The Justice Gap (UK); Greg Stratton: The Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative; Rachel Mendleson; The Toronto Star, and myself. Our panel was ably moderated by Suzanne Gower of the Manchester Innocence Project. (UK); Here is the paper I delivered.
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "It is important to stress that these journalistic accounts, typical of much of the reporting on Charles Smith before he began his slide into infamy, did not portray the 'real' Charles Smith. I can choose from many examples of the 'real' Charles Smith which I reported over the years. Here are but a few of them: Let's start with the day this "strong Christian" who says he shares 'God's love of the little children', brought his 11-year-old son to the exhumation of an 11-month-old baby boy, as the deceased baby's horrified grand-father looked on. Then there's the night this star of Ontario's forensic pediatric establishment, gots into a confrontation with the Ontario Provincial Police Officer who pulled him over for speeding. In her official complaint, she said Smith boasted about his importance and threatened to cut off his office's services to dead children in the area, if she persisted in giving him the ticket. Or how about the occasion when this supposedly independent coronial official agreed to participate in a secret police wiretap operation on the grieving mother of a deceased child, while making an official visit to her home."
PRESENTATION:
Who is Charles Smith?
Charles Smith is a flawed Canadian pathologist who has deservedly has been turfed out of Ontario's medical profession.
Some believe that he has been responsible for more wrongful convictions than anyone else in Canadian history.
His flawed opinions and testimony destroyed the lives of loving parents and caregivers.
Some were sent to prison as murderers of their own children.
Others had their surviving children wrested away from them by Child welfare authorities and put up for adoption.
Babies and children sadly die for many reasons.
Natural reasons too;
But in Smith's mind, they were always 'murdered'.
Indeed, the book I set out to write years ago - which morphed into The Charles Smith Blog - was going to be called "Manufacturing murder."
It was to be about a self-admitted ignoramus with an important public trust who admittedly overstated his knowledge, ability and qualifications - and confessed to a public Inquiry that he believed his job was to help the police get convictions.
Unfortunately, he did a very good job at that.
----------------------------------------
In this paper, I will focus on a question which has fascinated me for years.
How was Smith transformed from a rather mundane, little-known physician into a God-like figure in the world of paediatric forensic pathology?
Put another way, how did he become a renowned 'expert,' adored by police and prosecutors, for his ability to secure convictions in cases where there was scant, if any, evidence.
My answer may surprise some of you.
Police, prosecutors, hospital administrators, government officials, and regulators bear some of the responsibility.
In my view, however, the biggest culprit, for reasons which I will articulate, was the media, which helped create The Great Dr. Charles Randal Smith who caused all these horrors - and the media bears some responsibility for the wrongful convictions he caused.
----------------------------------------------------------------
So, how did this come about?
I explored this question in 2007 in a post on my 'Charles Smith Blog', headed, 'Smith and the Media; Part One: Why the media share the blame."
In this post I explained that Charles Smith was a masterful manipulator who had an uncanny way of attracting the media, noting that:
"He was accessible, articulate, intense - read 'photogenic' - (he) welcomed the cameras in his labs, appeared genuinely sympathetic, provided excellent copy and knew all of the buttons to push in order to get placed above the fold."
Smith even tried to manipulate me on one occasion - unsuccessfully I should add - after refusing to comment on of my Toronto Star stories. (Most likely after talking to his lawyer!);
I still get the shivers when I remember him saying words to the effect of:
Even some of the best, most experienced columnists and reporters around, such as the late Christie Blatchford, then a columnist at the Globe and Mail, fell under this master manipulator's sway.
"His tools consist of a scalpel and scissors. The dead children he examines, most are just babies, require nothing more.
When he has completed each autopsy there is not much left of the child, just an empty sack really.
In the blinding light of his autopsy room, Ontario's leading pediatric forensic pathologist sees all the missed opportunities that could have saved a life.
And then he gently puts the child's body into a bag, and goes on to the next case."
I can choose from many examples of the 'real' Charles Smith which I reported over the years. Here are but a few of them:
Let's start with the day this "strong Christian" who says he shares 'God's love of the little children', brought his 11-year-old son to the exhumation of an 11-month-old baby boy, as the deceased baby's horrified grand-father looked on.
Then there's the day this star of Ontario's forensic pediatric establishment, gots into a confrontation with the Ontario Provincial Police Officer who pulled him over one night for speeding.
In her official complaint, she said Smith boasted about his importance and threatened to cut off his office's services to dead children in the area, if she persisted in giving him the ticket.
Or how about the occasion when this supposedly independent coronial official agreed to participate in a secret police wiretap operation on the grieving mother of a deceased child, while making an official visit to her home.
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Your transgressions were egregious in nature, repulsive in result, and caused irreparable harm to many innocent victims," Gabel said to the empty chair reserved for Smith. (Who hadn't bothered to show up for his defrocking.)
"You had a duty to the public, to the administration of justice and to your profession. Your failure in all of these respects is abominable to this panel, to your fellow physicians and, as importantly, to the public."
Smith's actions compromised the administration of justice and he did not act morally, ethically or with the best interests of patients, said Gabel.
"By your actions you abysmally failed to do so in these areas and have subsequently disgraced our profession," he said. "We publicly deplore and denounce your behaviour.
Suffice it to say, as noted in the post, I have talked to reporters who were shocked to learn that the man they had written about so glowingly was now accused of being responsible for destroying lives and causing wrongful convictions.
------------------------------
So where are we now, fourteen years after Justice Stephen Goudge released his report on his independent inquiry on October 14, 2008 to a chorus of promised reforms?
Year after year I scan the papers on the anniversary date, which is coming up soon, hoping to learn if any the promised reforms were actually carried out.
Sadly, I'm still waiting, and due to media indifference the public still has no idea whether necessary steps have been taken to protect it from similar sagas.
Although we don't know whether the promises have been fulfilled, we do know that the reporter's job as the public's 'watchdog' is to keep an unflinching eye on public officials and institutions in nightmarish sagas such as this.
Yet, we let the public down when we helped create 'the Great Dr. Charles Randal Smith'.
Moreover, we compounded that failure, when we just moved on to other stories, and allowed this huge, tragic experience to fade into the dustbins of history.
--------------------------------------------------------------
And I'm still waiting for the answers to other important questions which need more than ever to be probed by the media.
For example: Where is Charles Smith and what is he up to?
Is he teaching pathology as he once did somewhere in Europe?
Is he practicing his trade in a hospital somewhere where his infamy is not known - or, who knows maybe war zone where they just don't care?
Is he laying low until the uninformed public forgets his ugly past, so can take advantage of time and disinterest to rewrite history and resuscitate the great Dr. Charles Randal Smith?
Why was he never prosecuted for possible crimes such as perjury and obstruction of justice. (Many of his innocent victims were prosecuted on the flimsiest 'evidence', which was little more than Charles Smith's twisted opinion);
And why has the media (other than the Charles Smith Blog) largely ignored the the three cases still before the courts - moving very slowly indeed - in which his victims are seeking vindication?
My final question, to end on a constructive note, is how can the media prevent the anointment of future Charles Smith's and his ilk - bearing in mind that Smith is not the only one: How about Colin Manock in Australia, Michael Heath in the U.K. and Barbara Knox in the U.S.A, all of whom have found there way into The Charles Smith Blog.
The answer to this final question, is, believe it or not, quite simple: Just do what journalists are expected to do in every story. Just do your job!
As my former Toronto Star colleague Donovan Vincent - now Toronto Star Ombudsman - recently explained when commenting on another issue:
"No matter how sympathetic the victim, reporters still need to ask probing questions and maintain a level of skepticism."
Yet Donovan also wisely acknowledges that journalists, as human beings, "have to balance skepticism with compassion," and that, "It isn't an easy task."
I couldn't agree more.
------------------------------
So, thank you Nexus for giving me the opportunity to present my views on this important topic.
I also want to thank my friend Win Wahrer of' Innocence Canada for involving me in this conference', and for giving me so much support and inspiration with my writing on wrongful convictions over many years
One disclaimer:
My comments today are directed toward a general media failure.
I would be remiss if I did not mention that there has been some stellar excellent reporting on Smith, and Smith related issues, over the years.
This includes: The Fifth Estate, a Canadian TV investigative program, Writer Jane O'Hara in McLean's magazine, and local reporters covering Smith trials.
Last, but not least, on this list, is my fellow panelist Rachel Mendleson, the Toronto Star investigative reporter (A true watch-dog with sharp teeth) who, after my retirement from the paper, exposed the Motherisk tainted hair drug-testing lab scandal at The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto - Charles Smith's employer and protector for years.
--------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resurce. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
