|
calling for an inquiry into the Newfoundland justice system
We aren't referring to the case of Richard Ryan, the dangerous sexual offender who was supposed to be shackled and guarded by two officers while on escorted release, and instead was left unshackled and guarded by only one officer -- at which point he escaped. (To general relief, he was recaptured Monday after 25 days at large.) That was the product of a monumental goof by Newfoundland's Corrections Department. No, the greater problem seems to be systemic. As The Globe's Kirk Makin reported yesterday, a province that prosecutes about four murder cases a year has seen three of them collapse in the past two years. In 1998, Gregory Parsons, who had been convicted in 1994 of the 1991 murder of his mother, was officially exonerated after DNA samples proved he wasn't the killer. Three months ago, the jury in a retrial found Ronald Dalton not guilty of the murder of his wife in 1988, a crime for which he had spent 8½ years in prison. On Wednesday of this week, the Crown stayed a murder charge against Randy Druken, who was convicted in 1995 of killing his girlfriend. Mr. Parsons was convicted on the hearsay evidence of people who said his mother had worried that he might one day kill her. There was no physical evidence; there were no witnesses or incriminating statements. An independent commissioner found that a constable in the case had "conducted himself in a manner that can best be described as overzealous and devoid of police professionalism." Even when the DNA evidence cleared Mr. Parsons in February of 1998, prosecutors merely stayed the proceedings against him; it took another nine months for the cloud to be officially lifted. Mr. Dalton won his acquittal after two forensic experts testified that his wife, far from being strangled to death, choked to death on food. They raised questions about the way the forensic pathologist at the first trial had conducted his investigation. Mr. Druken received his stay after DNA tests found that a cigarette that burned a hole at the murder scene was not his. The Newfoundland Court of Appeal had earlier ordered a retrial because a key witness recanted his testimony, saying the police had bullied him into lying. Mr. Parsons is now suing the police and the province. Mr. Dalton said in June that he would call for a public inquiry into his case. Mr. Druken is left under the cloud of his stay (which means the charge will remain live for another year) instead of receiving the acquittal his circumstances appear to warrant. As well as reminding us of the wisdom of not executing prisoners, these cases must have Newfoundlanders wondering what flaws in the provincial justice system produced these three injustices, and how many other injustices have yet to see the light. An independent public inquiry stands the best chance of finding out.
Three murder cases collapse within two years
The stay of proceedings in the Randy Druken murder case comes after a key witness recanted his testimony and DNA tests pointed toward somebody else as the killer. The murder case is the third in the province to collapse in the past two years, prompting calls yesterday for a major inquiry into the provincial justice system. Jerome Kennedy, a St. John's lawyer active on behalf of the wrongly convicted, said it is "absolutely scary" that there could be three wrongful murder convictions in a province that prosecutes just three or four murder cases each year. "It is time for an independent inquiry to look at what is going on here," Mr. Kennedy said in an interview. "Is it attributable to the police? Is it attributable to the Crown? The Newfoundland government is refusing to acknowledge that there are problems in the system, so we don't know what is going wrong." Yesterday's stay of proceedings leaves Mr. Druken in legal limbo. His retrial for the murder of Brenda Young will not go ahead, yet he has not been exonerated. If the charge is not reactivated within a year, it will disappear from the books. "This is not a happy day for Randy Druken," his lawyer, William Collins, said in a statement. "What has happened to Randy Druken today is wrong," Mr. Collins said. "The Crown should have entered an acquittal." The move comes several weeks after the Newfoundland Court of Appeal ordered a retrial for Mr. Druken on the basis that a key witness at his trial, identified as D.M., recanted his evidence. D.M. testified at the trial that Mr. Druken confessed the murder to him after a sexual relationship developed between them in jail. He later said the police harassed him into making the false statement. D.M. was sentenced to five years in prison in connection with his false testimony in the Druken case and several other offences. Ms. Young's body was found by her daughter in the living room of her home on June 12, 1993. She had been involved for a year in a stormy relationship with Mr. Druken. There was evidence of a struggle. A coffee table had been overturned, causing a cigarette to fall onto the floor and burn a hole in the carpet. Within two days Mr. Druken was arrested on other charges. He was charged with the murder on Aug. 20, 1993. The big break in Mr. Druken's case came late last year. A major reinvestigation of the case by the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary concluded that the cigarette at the murder scene probably landed on the carpet during the struggle, implying it belonged to the killer. At the request of the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted, Ontario's Centre of Forensic Sciences tested the butt last month. The DNA from it has been identified as coming from someone other than Mr. Druken. The man has not been arrested. In a release yesterday announcing its decision to enter a stay of proceedings, the Crown made reference to an opinion it sought from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney-General over the summer. "Ontario Crown counsel has concluded that the case against Mr. Druken is circumstantial, and further investigation is required," the Crown statement said. Mr. Collins was critical of the statement yesterday. He said it reinforces a suggestion that the Crown believes Mr. Druken is somehow guilty. Mr. Kennedy said the attitude is typical of a province that is in deep denial about the shortcomings of its justice system. On June 8 Thomas Sophonow was officially absolved of an 18-year-old killing of a 16-year-old Winnipeg doughnut shop waitress for which he had spent 45 months in prison. His case joined other high-profile cases, including those of Donald Marshall, David Milgaard and Guy Paul Morin. The first of the most recent miscarriages of justice in Newfoundland came in 1998, when Gregory Parsons was exonerated in the murder of his mother, Catherine Carroll. Mr. Parsons, who is also represented by Mr. Kennedy, had spent three months in jail and six months under virtual house arrest. In June of this year, Ronald Dalton was found not guilty of murdering his wife. He had served nine years in prison for the crime. Mr. Kennedy, who represented the 31-year-old man at his retrial, produced five forensic pathologists who testified that the victim choked to death on food. Mr. Kennedy said yesterday that in each wrongful conviction, the Department of Justice has clung tenaciously to its belief that the defendant was guilty instead of moving to exonerate him when the cases collapsed.
Related links:
|
|
By BRIAN CALLAHAN, The Telegram
A judge has told the provincial government to pay a former employee close to $1 million in damages for mistreatment after his job was declared redundant in 1991. The decision by Justice Seamus O’Regan was filed with Newfoundland Supreme Court this week. O’Regan ruled in July 1998 that government’s failure to properly deal with Kenneth Bradbury through a rehiring policy hurt Bradbury’s chances of finding a new job with the province. He never did, and was forced to move to the mainland for work. O’Regan concluded he must be compensated for damages. And was he ever. “The purpose of my findings is to place Mr. Bradbury back in the same position that he would have been had he stayed with government as an employee in the position he identified back in 1991, working in that position until age 60 and then retiring,” the judge stated. “He is entitled to all the benefits which would have accrued together with both pre- and post-judgment interest.” That includes nine years’ salary — almost $500,000 alone — plus pension benefits. O’Regan also said Bradbury, who turns 60 this year, was owed money for out-of-pocket expenses ($4,000) and mental stress and hardship ($20,000). Contacted Thursday, Bradbury’s lawyer, Peter O’Flaherty, declined comment on the judgment, saying he wanted to consult with his client first. Bradbury, who lives in Ontario, was a professional engineer hired as the province’s mines inspecting engineer in 1981. Five years later, he was appointed manager of mines and inspections. But in 1991, Bradbury lost his job under then-premier Clyde Wells’ sweeping reduction of government workers under a policy of heightened fiscal restraint. Bradbury’s job was declared redundant. In his 1998 ruling, O’Regan noted government’s so-called re-employment priority policy at the time recognized that “an employee declared redundant had lost his position through no fault of his own, (and) therefore was to be given priority for re-employment.” During a 1996 wrongful dismissal suit, Bradbury testified he found a management job with the former Department of Employment and Labour Relations he felt he was qualified for. But a recommendation by Michael Dwyer, then the assistant deputy minister in the department, stated Bradbury was technically sound but “totally inadequate” in management skills. O’Regan noted Bradbury didn’t know about the “damaging negative reference” until the trial was over. After finding out, Bradbury applied and got the trial reopened. It was the Public Service Commission’s job to carry out the priority policy, O’Regan said in his 1998 ruling, but they dropped the ball in Bradbury’s case. “The evidence clearly shows the Public Service Commission was negligent in dealing with Bradbury,” O’Regan stated. “Suffice to say … this negative reference was instrumental in precluding Bradbury from obtaining the management position that he felt he was entitled to.” O’Regan also noted Bradbury was left with the impression by the Public Service Commission that his priority basis for re-employment was only for one month. In fact, the judge said, due to internal policy changes, his priority position was extended by at least seven months — a change Bradbury knew nothing about. “In acting negligently on his behalf, and not providing him with the information that was available as to the extension of his priority position, as well as not dealing with the negative reference in the appropriate manner, (Bradbury) was placed in a position where he lost his opportunity to be re-employed and must be compensated in damages.” The judge added there was “clearly a duty of care owed by government to Bradbury, and government’s failure to deal properly with that duty was a serious breach.” Meantime, a clearly frustrated Opposition Leader Ed Byrne said Thursday the judgment is yet another case of the Newfoundland public paying for a Liberal government’s mistakes. “The big issue here is how government continues to deal with its employees,” the Tory leader told The Telegram. “This is yet another huge amount of money that you and I have to hand out because there’s no management system in place. The level of mismanagement is disgraceful.” He acknowledged the people who occupy the premier’s chair and some other positions may be different than in 1991, but many of the same ministers remain. “This is a huge problem and there’s nothing in place to fix it. (And) it sets a precedent because there are many other cases like this one before the courts yet to be settled.” In the recent past, government has paid out millions in cases where it was successfully sued, or they settled out of court. A settlement with St. John’s businessman Bas Dobbin regarding the 1991 Trans City affair — the controversial awarding of three hospital contracts — cost the province about $750,000. And businessman Frank Ryan sued the province over its failure to renew a lease in the Murray Premises in a timely manner. He, too, settled out of court — for an estimated $4.5 million.
Related information:
|