Tammy Bouvette: British Columbia: (Part 3): Why Innocence Canada sought leave to intervene in Tammy Bouvette's appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada to clear her name by replacing the neutral 'stay of proceedings' she had been granted by the British Columbia Court of Appeal with an outright 'acquittal' that unequivocally affirms her innocence, as per the organization's factum - (a necessary step in light of findings that the prosecution withheld from her lawyers crucial evidence that proved she was innocent, and dubious pathology evidence. HL); Decision to be released tomorrow (Friday, June 6); Stay tuned!

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Part 2: Innocence Canada was one of four parties granted leave to intervene in Tammy Bouvette's appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada whose decision is to be released tomorrow (Friday June 6). (The other three are the Attorney General of Ontario, The Canadian Civil Liberties Association, and The Independent Criminal Defence Advocacy Society). You can read Innocence Canada's  application for  intervention at the link below. One passage stands out to my mind. The 'Conclusion.'

-------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION:  " Canada has learned much about causes of wrongful convictions since Donald Marshall Jr. was wrongly convicted in 1989 and a Commission of Inquiry examined how that tragedy occurred. We have learned that experts can be wrong or influenced by bias.

We have learned that people, especially vulnerable people, sometimes plead guilty when they are innocent.

We have learned that failures of the police and Crown to disclose important information to defence have caused wrongful convictions.

And we have learned that courts of appeal are not well equipped to remedy factual error under our narrow appellate standards of review.

For those who have suffered a miscarriage of justice, stays of proceedings are inferior remedies that leave them under a cloud of suspicion for the rest of their lives.

The framework that governs an acquittal under s. 686(2) should be flexible and expansive to help dispel that cloud, restoring the presumption of innocence that the wrongfully convicted duly deserve."

The entire application for intervention  can be read at: 

https://www.scc-csc.ca/pdf/case-documents/40780/FM040_Intervener_Innocence-Canada.pdf-

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. 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;

————————————————————————————————---------