Showing posts with label ontario court of appeal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ontario court of appeal. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

MARIA SHEPHERD CASE: PART 4; COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED HER TO APPEAL ALMOST 20 YEARS AFTER SHE PLEADED GUILTY TO MANSLAUGHTER: HER AFFIDAVIT;



"I STILL DO NOT KNOW WHAT CAUSED KASANDRA’S DEATH. I KNOW THAT HER DEATH MAY HAVE RESULTED FROM EVENTS BEFORE APRIL 9, 1991, INCLUDING THE POSSIBILITY OF EPILEPTIC SEIZURES, OR AN EARLIER INJURY TO HER BRAIN THAT NO ONE KNEW ABOUT. NEITHER OF THESE POSSIBILITIES HAD BEEN RAISED WITH ME BY MR. WILEY, OR ANYONE ELSE, AS FEASIBLE BEFORE I PLED GUILTY. I NOW KNOW THAT THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT I INJURED KASANDRA WHEN I PUSHED HER OR THAT MY WRISTWATCH LEFT A BRUISE ON THE UNDERSIDE OF HER SCALP. DR. SMITH’S TESTIMONY IN THESE REGARDS HAD A HUGE EFFECT ON THE LAWYERS REPRESENTING ME AND WAS A CRITICAL FACTOR IN MY DECISION TO PLEAD GUILTY TO MANSLAUGHTER. I HOPE THAT I CAN NOW PROVE THAT I DID NOT ASSAULT OR ABUSE KASANDRA AND DID NOT CAUSE HER DEATH. I WOULD NEVER HAVE PLED GUILTY IF I KNEW THEN WHAT I KNOW NOW ABOUT DR. SMITH AND KASANDRA’S DEATH."

AFFIDAVIT OF MARIA SHEPHERD: ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL;

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

Maria Shepherd's affidavit is a moving, if not disturbing, document that was filed recently in the Ontario Court of Appeal.

It reads as follows:


I, MARIA SHEPHERD...hereby make oath and say as follows:

1. On October 22, 1992, I was convicted of manslaughter in the death of my step-daughter, Kasandra, who died when she was three years old. I was sentenced to two years less a day in prison. This affidavit describes the events leading up to Kasandra’s death, and why I eventually decided to plead guilty. I do not believe I caused Kasandra’s death, and have spent more than fifteen years mourning her loss and coming to terms with my decision to plead guilty to something that I always believed I did not do.

2. I was born on August 20, 1969 in Manila, Philippines. I am now 39 years old. I became a Canadian citizen in 1975 at the age of 6. My father, Ramon Crespo, and my mother, Marie, are now 75 years of age. They have been married for 55 years. My father was a precious metals consultant, and my mother worked for the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and Sears Canada. I have a grade 9 education, having left school at age 14.

3. I lived with my parents until I became pregnant with my eldest son, Jordan. At first I lived with friends, and then found my own apartment in Rexdale. Jordan was born on July 23, 1986, when I was 16 years of age. In 1987, Jordan and I moved back home with my parents due to my financial circumstances.

4. I now live...with my husband Ashley and two of our children, Natasha (19) and Chanel (16). My two other children, Jordan (22) and Chelsea (18), live on their own. I work as a store manager for Y.M. Inc, a Canadian clothing retailer. My husband is a self-employed process server.

Kasandra’s Life Before April 9, 1991:

5. Kasandra’s natural parents, Amanda Hislop and Ashley Shepherd, both of whom I knew well, were in a common-law relationship. Kasandra was born on December 15, 1987. I was at the hospital for her birth. She would be 21 today if she were still alive.

6. Ashley and Amanda separated in June, 1988. Sometime after that he and I began to date. In November, 1988, I moved into Ashley’s home. We were married on August 5, 1989. Kasandra was still with her mother, and Ashley had access rights. In 1989, Ashley decided to seek full custody of Kasandra. We retained a lawyer, began the legal process, and in November, 1989, we were granted interim custody. Her mother was given substantial access rights. By that time, my financial situation had improved and my son Jordan was living with us as well.

7. I still remember being surprised at how smart Kasandra was for her age. We enrolled her at the Tiny Tim Developmental School with Jordan. I quickly grew to love Kasandra as my own daughter, and she bonded really well with Jordan. Kasandra’s mother continued to have regular access to Kasandra. She made several reports to the Children’s Aid Society and the police alleging that Kasandra was being abused by Ashley and myself. Her complaints were not sustained by Children’s Aid or the police. We also made complaints about the way she and her new partner treated Kasandra. These complaints were also considered to be unfounded by the authorities. I was very protective of Kasandra. I cooperated with the authorities when they made inquiries about Kasandra and I made sure she was regularly seen by our family physician, Dr. Chiang.

8. On February 14, 1990, my daughter Natasha was born. My parents then purchased a new home in Brampton. In January, 1991, Ashley, Jordan, Kasandra, Natasha and I moved into their new home. We had to withdraw Kasandra from Tiny Tim for financial reasons. On February 27, 1991, I gave birth to my own third child, a second daughter, Chelsea.

9. In January, 1991, Kasandra started to get sick. It began with symptoms of the stomach flu. She lost weight, as much as 12 pounds. I took her to see Dr. Chiang who thought she might have a blood disorder. I took her for blood tests. That same evening (February 11, 1991), when she did not get better, Dr. Chiang, our family doctor, suggested that I take her to the hospital. I accepted his advice and took her to Peel Memorial Hospital. She was put on intravenous drip and remained hospitalized there for four weeks. The police came to the hospital to inquire about Kasandra’s condition and I spoke to them. Doctors could not diagnose her illness. Initially they diagnosed her as having gastroenteritis and dehydration. The doctors felt that her frequent vomiting might be due to psychological stress arising from her parents’ separation and the custody dispute. Her condition improved somewhat.

10. The CAS visited our house prior to Kasandra’s release from hospital and concluded that she should return home to live with me and Ashley. On March 6, 1991, the doctors, nurses and social workers at the hospital held a case conference about Kasandra’s condition. They decided to allow her to return home and her progress was to be monitored at home by a nurse and a worker from the Children’s Aid Society. On March 8, 1991, Kasandra was discharged from the hospital and we brought her home.

11. After her release from hospital, Kasandra seemed to be getting better. Her mother continued to have regular access. Then, after two weeks, Kasandra started vomiting again. It got to the point that she was vomiting after almost every meal. Ashley and I were extremely concerned and could not understand how so many tests during her one month hospitalization at Peel Memorial Hospital had failed to result in a diagnosis. Dr. Chiang thought her vomiting was caused by “emotional bruising”. We also noticed that Kasandra would often lose her balance, and trip and fall. It was heartbreaking to see her constant suffering. Meanwhile, the Children’s Aid were continuing to monitor her progress.

The Events of April 9, 1991:

12. On April 9, 1991, the day started off uneventfully. Ashley left for work around 8:30 a.m., leaving me at home with Kasandra, Chelsea and Natasha and my older brother, Rene. Jordan was staying with his biological father for a few days. I remember Kasandra took a long time to eat her breakfast, but seemed alright after that, and she played with Natasha for much of the morning. Ashley came home for lunch, but did not stay long. Rene came and went throughout the day. I spoke with Dr. Chiang by phone about Kasandra in the afternoon, and he suggested that we send her to live with her mother for a while to see if her symptoms would get any better. This made sense to me. I called Amanda, and we made arrangements for Kasandra to move to her house the following weekend.

13. I had plans to go out and see my mother that evening, so I began to get ready in my bedroom. Kasandra was with me. She suddenly became sick and vomited on the carpet. Her shoulders were twitching and her eyes were rolled back in her head. She vomited again. She said she was tired and wanted to lie down, so I let her sleep on my bed. My brother and his friends came over to visit. When Kasandra woke up she seemed better, so I gave her a shower and dressed her.

14. At one point in the afternoon, I heard a thump upstairs. I went up and found Natasha lying on the floor. Kasandra was there, and I was annoyed at her for letting Natasha fall off the bed. Then Chelsea started crying. I asked Kasandra to help me. She refused to move, so I pushed her out of the way using a back hand type motion with my left hand. Kasandra neither fell nor cried, and my gesture left no mark on her. It was ordinary parental discipline of a disobedient child at a difficult moment. To me, it never constituted “an assault” or “abuse” of Kasandra.

15. Ashley came home at about 5:45 p.m. He wanted to take the children for haircuts, but I did not want them to go out because it was raining. We argued and fought over the car keys. I telephoned my mother and, while on the phone, heard Kasandra vomiting upstairs. I went upstairs and found Ashley with her in the upstairs washroom. He cleaned her up, and we called Dr. Chiang. Kasandra seemed sicker than ever. Dr. Chiang told us to bring her in to see him the next day.

16. What happened next was terrifying. Kasandra was lying on the living room couch. Ashley was standing beside her. She did not respond when he spoke to her. He shook her a few times. She went stiff, with her fists clenched. She was making squealing and wheezing sounds that I had never heard before. She started shaking, her eyes rolled back in her head, and we could not find a pulse. I grabbed ice and cold water to put on her face thinking it would help, but it did not. Ashley called 911 while I held her and we started doing CPR. By this time it was almost 9:00 p.m. Kasandra was semi-conscious, when the ambulance attendants arrived and took her to the hospital.

17. Kasandra was first taken to the Peel Memorial Hospital. She continued to have seizures. She was transferred to the Hospital for Sick Children in the early morning hours of April 10. The doctors told us that she had severe brain swelling, and that her condition was unlikely to improve. She was removed from life support and died on April 11, 1991 at 3:50 p.m.

The Investigation and Prosecution:

18. When I was first interviewed by police on April 16, 1991, I told them as much as I could remember about what happened that day. I was traumatized and in a state of shock, but was as cooperative as I could be. The police were not believing my account of the events leading up to Kasandra’s death. They asked me to take a lie detector test and I agreed, because I had nothing to hide.

19. On April 24, 1991, I went to the police station to take the polygraph. Detective Stephenson then told me I had failed and was lying. He told me what Dr. Smith had told them. He said that Dr. Smith had told them that the injury that killed Kasandra had occurred between three and five hours before her seizures started, that it was not an accident, and that I was the person who must have caused her injury. It was obvious that I was being accused of causing her death. I tried to think of what I might have done, and then remembered I had pushed her with the back of my hand that afternoon when I was trying to look after Chelsea and Natasha. I told Detective Stephenson of this. They told me I had left a mark on Kasandra’s scalp from the imprint of my watch. I was arrested and charged with manslaughter.

20. I was released the next day on a surety bail in the amount of $20,000.00. My son and two daughters were now in my mother’s custody. My conditions prohibited contact with my children unless in the presence of my mother. My children were my life, and my separation from them was overwhelming for me. My family and friends supported me, but neighbours used to stop and stare at my house. I became isolated and depressed. Only the support of my family and friends kept me going.

21. I could not accept that I had caused Kasandra’s death because I knew what had happened in the bedroom. When I told other people what had happened, including Liisa Dickinson of CAS, who testified at my preliminary hearing, I described it in the same way – as a push that neither caused Kasandra to fall down nor cry. However, my lawyer, Robert Callaghan, who conducted my preliminary hearing, told me that there was no basis on which to challenge Dr. Smith’s testimony. He told me that Dr. Smith was a force to be reckoned with. I think his words were “he is the best of the best”. I remember the first day of the preliminary hearing when Dr. Smith walked into court – it was like a superhero entered the room. Everyone stopped what they were doing and stared at him.

22. Tom Wiley, who was my lawyer at trial, talked to me about the case in the same way as Mr. Callaghan. He told me that Dr. Smith’s findings established that Kasandra had received a major blow on the back of her head that left a mark in the shape of my watch, and caused the brain swelling which led to her death. This did not fit what I knew had happened on April 9, 1991 but it seemed to be proven as a scientific fact. He also told me that Dr. Smith was suggesting that I had violently shaken Kasandra. In time, I felt compelled to accept it and ‘admit’ it.

23. My family was supportive of me throughout the court proceedings. They went through a lot, and throughout the process took care of Jordan, Natasha, and Chelsea. Although I felt I had not done anything wrong, I felt extremely guilty. I realized that if I went through with a trial, my family would probably have to testify. I also knew that if I was convicted after trial, I would face a prison sentence that was much longer than if I pled guilty, likely by years. I could not bear the thought of being separated from my children for that long, or of asking my parents to take care of them for so many years. My mother was starting to get sick from the stress, and was diagnosed with heart problems. I believed that my circumstances were the cause of her illness.

24. In the summer, 1992, I realized I was pregnant with my third daughter Chanel. This increased my anxiety and stress. I thought I might have to give birth in prison. I knew Chanel would be apprehended by the Children’s Aid Society at birth. My lawyer Mr. Wiley told me that if I pled guilty to manslaughter, the Children’s Aid Society had agreed to let me have my children back in due course, because I would be showing remorse for my actions.

25. During this time I was seeing Dr. Bray, a psychologist. She diagnosed me as suffering from depression (I have been on anti-depressants for many years). Shortly before my trial commenced, she spoke to Mr. Wiley and expressed concern about my emotional health. On September 28, 1992, my trial began. I pleaded not guilty. I knew Mr. Wiley had been having discussions with the Crown about a joint submission on sentence if I pleaded guilty. He told me that I would be given a sentence of two years less a day in a reformatory if I pled guilty, and would be able to serve the time in the Vanier prison which was near my parents’ home. It was even possible that I could be on parole in time to give birth to my daughter Chanel. Mr. Wiley kept telling me that he had no evidence to challenge what Dr. Smith said about Kasandra’s death, and I was fighting a losing battle. On October 1, 1992, I pled guilty to manslaughter before Mr. Justice Langdon in the Superior Court of Justice in Brampton, and admitted through Mr. Wiley that I had hit Kasandra and caused her death.

26. On October 22, 1992, I was sentenced to two years less a day in prison, followed by three years of probation. On March 31, 1993, Chanel was born. While in prison, I understood that I should continue to ‘admit’ having hit Kasandra if I wanted early parole so I did so. My children needed me and I needed them. I was granted parole on June 21, 1993. In 1995, I regained custody of my four children. I felt as if I had abandoned them, and felt terrible for having placed the burden of their care on my parents for so long. I have kept my children ever since.

Recent Information About the Evidence in My Case:

27. In 2007, I was contacted by James Lockyer from the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC), who told me about the ongoing review of Dr. Smith’s cases, and said that my case was one of the ones that had been examined. I had seen questions raised about Dr. Smith in the media. I met with Mr. Lockyer at Mr. Wiley’s office shortly after he contacted me in April, 2007, as well as with Mr. Justice Goudge in June, 2007, before the Inquiry began. Even though it brought back traumatic memories and reopened old wounds for both me and my family, I was eager to accept AIDWYC’s offer of assistance to review my conviction.

28. I followed the Inquiry into Pediatric Forensic Pathology in Ontario closely, and attended on several occasions to listen to the testimony. I have read Dr. Whitwell’s report that was prepared for the Inquiry, and I watched her testimony on the internet. I went to the Inquiry and watched much of Dr. Smith’s testimony. I also attended Mr. Justice Goudge’s press conference on October 1, 2008 when he released his final report, and I have started reading it.

29. I still do not know what caused Kasandra’s death. I know that her death may have resulted from events before April 9, 1991, including the possibility of epileptic seizures, or an earlier injury to her brain that no one knew about. Neither of these possibilities had been raised with me by Mr. Wiley, or anyone else, as feasible before I pled guilty. I now know that there is no scientific evidence that I injured Kasandra when I pushed her or that my wristwatch left a bruise on the underside of her scalp. Dr. Smith’s testimony in these regards had a huge effect on the lawyers representing me and was a critical factor in my decision to plead guilty to manslaughter. I hope that I can now prove that I did not assault or abuse Kasandra and did not cause her death. I would never have pled guilty if I knew then what I know now about Dr. Smith and Kasandra’s death.


30. I believe it would be in the interests of justice to allow me to appeal my manslaughter conviction. I did not cause Kasandra’s death, and the fact that I have been convicted of doing so has haunted me ever since. I ask the Court to give me an opportunity to appeal my conviction....


Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

MARIA SHEPHERD CASE; PART 3; GLOBE AND MAIL JUSTICE REPORTER KIRK MAKIN REPORTS;

"MS. SHEPHERD SAID IN AN AFFIDAVIT THAT HER LAWYER WARNED HER AGAINST TRYING TO PLEAD NOT GUILTY. "HE TOLD ME THAT DR. SMITH WAS A FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH," IT SAID. "I REMEMBER THE FIRST DAY OF THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, WHEN DR. SMITH WALKED INTO COURT. IT WAS LIKE A SUPERHERO HAD ENTERED THE ROOM.""

JUSTICE REPORTER KIRK MAKIN; GLOBE AND MAIL;

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

"Seventeen years after she pleaded guilty to killing her three-year-old stepdaughter, a Toronto woman was permitted yesterday to reopen her case and seek exoneration," Justice Reporter Kirk Makin reports under the heading "17-year-old manslaughter case to be reopened;"

"Moments after Ontario Court of Appeal Judge Marc Rosenberg granted Maria Shepherd's request, the mother of four wept in a courthouse hallway and said that going through life as a reviled child killer "has been extremely difficult. It has not been a journey that I would wish on anyone at all," the story, published earlier today" continues;

""There were many circumstances surrounding my plea - first and foremost, the loss of my children," she said.

"Being separated from the children was probably the worst thing I could imagine at the time."

Crown counsel Jennifer Woollcombe consented to reopening the case yesterday.

Ms. Shepherd, a 39-year-old Filipina immigrant, spent two years less a day in jail after pleading guilty to manslaughter in the 1991 death of her stepdaughter, Kasandra.

Ms. Shepherd acknowledged that she struck the child in a moment of frustration, but claimed it was a minor blow that she could not have imagined would have led to the child having seizures and dying.

The Shepherd case is one of a dozen cases to come up for judicial review following the discrediting of Charles Smith, a top forensic pathologist who supplied key evidence against the defendants.

Ms. Shepherd said in an affidavit that her lawyer warned her against trying to plead not guilty. "He told me that Dr. Smith was a force to be reckoned with," it said. "I remember the first day of the preliminary hearing, when Dr. Smith walked into court. It was like a superhero had entered the room."

James Lockyer, a lawyer for the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted, said in an interview that the Shepherd case is inordinately complicated because Ms. Shepherd had many interactions with the medical and children's aid systems prior to Kasandra's death.

Indeed, a lengthy coroner's inquiry held into Kasandra's death resulted in dozens of recommendations on how to prevent similar deaths.

"There are huge quantities of material that make it hard to assimilate," Mr. Lockyer said.

"And Smith's findings are criticized in several regards, not just one. Almost everything he said seems to have been wrong.""


Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

MARIA SHEPHERD CASE: PART TWO; TORONTO STAR'S EXPANDED REPORT FOR PRINT EDITION; LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER TRACEY TYLER;



"A 1997 INQUEST INTO KASANDRA'S DEATH, WHICH SMITH ALLEGED WAS CAUSED BY A BLOW TO THE HEAD, ENDED WITH 73 RECOMMENDATIONS AIMED AT GETTING SOCIETY TO TAKE CHILD ABUSE MORE SERIOUSLY.

YESTERDAY, ONTARIO'S CHIEF FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST, DR. MICHAEL POLLANEN, SAID IT IS UNCLEAR IF KASANDRA DIED FROM A HEAD INJURY. HE SAID THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST SHE DIED OF NATURAL CAUSES, SUCH AS EPILEPSY.


REPORTER TRACEY TYLER: THE TORONTO STAR; PHOTO: RENE JOHNSTON/TORONTO STAR: MARIA SHEPHERD, DAUGHTER CHELSEA AND SON JORDAN (REAR) OUTSIDE ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL AT OSGOODE HALL MAY 12, 2009;"

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

"With a powerful pathologist set to deliver testimony that would link her to her stepdaughter's death, Maria Shepherd faced a stark choice: Plead guilty or risk losing her other children permanently," legal affairs reporter Tracey Tyler's expanded report for the Toronto Star's print edition begins;

"Pregnant with her fourth child, Shepherd settled on the option that promised a shorter sentence, early parole and the prospect of quickly reuniting with her family," the story, published earlier today under the heading, "Woman battles to clear her name" and the by-line, "Wins right to appeal manslaughter conviction in 1991 death handled by disgraced pathologist," continues;

"Under what she describes today as "extreme" pressure, Shepherd pleaded guilty in 1992 to manslaughter in the death of her stepdaughter, Kasandra, 3.

"I needed to do what I had to do to protect myself and my family," said Shepherd. "Being separated from the children is probably the worst thing I could imagine at the time."

Nearly 17 years later, with new evidence exposing pathologist Dr. Charles Smith's work in the case as "complete nonsense," the Ontario Court of Appeal took the unusual step yesterday of allowing Shepherd, 39, to appeal her conviction.

A 1997 inquest into Kasandra's death, which Smith alleged was caused by a blow to the head, ended with 73 recommendations aimed at getting society to take child abuse more seriously.

Yesterday, Ontario's chief forensic pathologist, Dr. Michael Pollanen, said it is unclear if Kasandra died from a head injury. He said there is evidence to suggest she died of natural causes, such as epilepsy.

Shepherd was a young mother with three children in 1991. Kasandra was her husband's daughter from a previous relationship. That January, Kasandra began to lose weight and developed the first of a series of illnesses, which doctors variously attributed to flu, a blood disorder or emotional trauma stemming from her parents' custody battle. She had been vomiting the day she died, April 11, 1991.

That day, Shepherd heard a thump on the floor of an upstairs bedroom and discovered her oldest daughter, Natasha, had fallen out of bed. As she attempted to rescue Natasha, Shepherd said, she pushed Kasandra out of the way with a backhanded sweeping motion.

Smith would later suggest the incident created a doughnut-shaped bruise in tissue deep beneath Kasandra's skull. He asked police to see if they could find an object similar in size and shape to the bruise. They produced Shepherd's wristwatch. Holding the watch over a photograph of the bruise, Smith pronounced it "a very nice fit."

Dr. Helen Whitwell, a forensic pathologist for Britain's Home Office who reviewed the case, said Smith's "overlay" technique was "complete nonsense."

Kasandra's case was one of 20 in which Smith was found to have committed fundamental errors by the Goudge inquiry. But in 1991, after Shepherd had been charged, Smith's opinion was virtually impossible to challenge in court.

His views "had a huge effect on the lawyers representing me and was a critical factor in my decision to plead guilty to manslaughter," Shepherd, a clothing store manager, said in an affidavit.

Pleading guilty allowed her to avoid spending up to five years in a Kingston prison. Instead, she was sentenced to two years less a day in a Brampton reformatory, near her parents' home. As a condition of bail, her children were placed in the custody of Shepherd's mother. It took three years of legal battles to put the family back together.

Shepherd's lawyer James Lockyer said the appeal will likely be heard next year."


Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

BREAKING NEWS: MARIA SHEPHERD CASE; PART 1: APPEAL COURT GIVES GREEN LIGHT TO MOTHER CONVICTED ON DR. CHARLES SMITH'S TESTIMONY ALMOST 20 YEARS AGO;



"DR. HELEN, A FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST FOR ENGLAND'S HOME OFFICE, WHO REVIEWED THE CASE FOR ONTARIO'S CORONER, SAID SMITH'S "OVERLAY" TECHNIQUE WAS "COMPLETE NONSENSE."

IT'S A METHOD THAT CAN ONLY BE USED WHEN ONE IS ATTEMPTING TO DETERMINE THE SOURCE OF AN EXTERNAL INJURY — SUCH AS A MARK THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN LEFT BY THE SOLE OF A SHOE — AND IS MEANINGLESS WHEN IT COMES TO INTERNAL BRUISING.

DR. MICHAEL POLLANEN, ONTARIO'S CHIEF FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST, CALLED SMITH'S WOUND-WEAPON MATCHING ANALYSIS "PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC" AND "OUTSIDE THE MAINSTREAM" OF FORENSIC PATHOLOGY."

REPORTER TRACEY TYLER: THE TORONTO STAR; PHOTO: RENE JOHNSTON/TORONTO STAR: MARIA SHEPHERD, DAUGHTER CHELSEA AND SON JORDAN (REAR) OUTSIDE ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL AT OSGOODE HALL MAY 12, 2009;

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet another mother has been granted leave to appeal a conviction many years ago that rested on the flawed testimony of Dr. Charles Smith;

Some observers have quipped that Ontario's highest court could devote an entire court-room to appeals launched by Dr. Smith's victims;

"Nearly 20 years after she was imprisoned on the basis of "complete nonsense" from a disgraced pathologist, the Ontario Court of Appeal has taken the unusual step of allowing a mother of four from Brampton to appeal her manslaughter conviction," Legal Affairs Reporter Tracey Tyler's story begins, under the heading: "Mother cpnvicted on Charles Smith's testimony appeals;"

""This has not been a journey that I would wish on anyone," Maria Shepherd, 39, said today as she struggled with her emotions outside a courtroom at Osgoode Hall," the story continues.

"Her two eldest children, Jordan, 23, and Natasha, 19, accompanied their mother to court.

In 1992, under what she described today as "extreme" pressure, Shepherd pleaded guilty to manslaughter in connection with the death of her stepdaughter Kasandra, 3.

In an affidavit filed with the court, Shepherd said her own defence lawyer described the Crown's star witness, Dr. Charles Smith, as a force to be reckoned with. If convicted at the end of a trial, she was likely to be sent to a Kingston women's prison for between three and five years.

But if she pleaded guilty, she was likely to receive a sentence of two years less a day in a Brampton reformatory, near her parents' home. Her plea would be taken as a sign of remorse, bettering her chances for parole after a few months and being reunited with her children.

Three of her children had been placed in the custody of her mother and Shepherd, who was pregnant at the time, was worried the fourth would be seized by Children's Aid.

"I needed to do what I had to do to protect myself and my family," said Shephard, who manages a retail clothing store. "Being separated from my children is probably the worst thing I could imagine at the time."

In fact, it took three years of family court battles before they were reunited.

Meanwhile, in 2005, Ontario's chief coroner ordered a review of 45 suspicious autopsies performed by Smith. Kasandra's case was one of 20 in which Smith was found to have made serious and fundamental errors.

Smith said a doughnut-shaped bruise deep in the tissue beneath the child's skull resulted in fatal brain swelling. He asked police to find an object similar in size and shape to the bruise. They came back with Shepherd's wristwatch.

Smith held the watch over a photograph of the bruise and pronounced it "a very nice fit."

Shepherd had admitted to pushing Kasandra out of the way with a sweeping motion as she attempted to rescue another daughter who had fallen out of her bed in April, 1991.

But it amounted to minor physical contact and not the blow described by Smith, the appeal court has been told.

Dr. Helen, a forensic pathologist for England's Home Office, who reviewed the case for Ontario's coroner, said Smith's "overlay" technique was "complete nonsense."

It's a method that can only be used when one is attempting to determine the source of an external injury — such as a mark that might have been left by the sole of a shoe — and is meaningless when it comes to internal bruising.

Dr. Michael Pollanen, Ontario's chief forensic pathologist, called Smith's wound-weapon matching analysis "pseudoscientific" and "outside the mainstream" of forensic pathology.

It is unclear if Kasandra had a fatal head injury at all but there is evidence to suggest she may have died of natural causes such as epilepsy, Pollanen said in a report prepared for the Goudge inquiry into flaws in the province's pediatric forensic pathology system. She had been sick and losing weight in the months preceding her death and had a history of seizures.

Whitwell also said epilepsy should have been explored as a cause of death, adding the bruising could have also been caused by a fall.

Their opinions are expected to be filed as fresh evidence in Shepherd's appeal, which could be heard late this year, but is more likely to be heard in 2010."


Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Part Six: Gaurov's Father: Spotlight On The Court Of Appeal;



"FRESH EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF NEW MEDICAL EVIDENCE IS NOW AVAILABLE WHICH ESTABLISHES THAT THE DECEASED BABY, GAUROV KUMAR, LIKELY DIED FROM ACCIDENTAL OR NATURAL CAUSES AND SHOULD BE ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE ON APPEAL;"

NOTICE OF APPEAL: ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL;

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

Dinesh Kumar's fight for exoneration after sixteen years is now before the Ontario Court of Appeal.

To its credit, the Ontario Government has agreed that the appeal has merit - and has not put any obstacles in its way.

To this writer's knowledge, at the moment more than a dozen cases involving Dr. Charles Smith have been filed in the Ontario Court of Appeal.

Mr. Kumar is appealing his conviction on the following grounds:

0: Fresh evidence in the form of new medical evidence is now available which establishes that the deceased baby, Gaurov Kumar, likely died from accidental or natural causes and should be admitted into evidence on appeal;

0: There was no absence of due diligence on the part of the defence at trial.

0: Leave should be granted to the Appellant to withdraw his plea of guilty, and,

(0) The fresh evidence is such that to sustain the Appellant’s conviction would amount to a miscarriage of justice.

In a nutshell, he is asking the Court to admit the fresh evidence, grant leave to withdraw his plea of guilty should be granted, quash the conviction, and enter a verdict of acquittal.

A date has not yet been set for the appeal.

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;