Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Canadian Court Overturns 1959 Murder Verdict

He was 14 years old when he was sentenced to hang. The year was 1959 and he had been convicted in Canada of raping and killing a 12-year old.

Due to his age, and the fear of political backlash, his term was commuted to life in prison. He was paroled after 10 years behind bars according to a New York Times article today (sub. req., an AP version is here).

And now, 48 years later, the conviction has been vacated.

According to the Times:

Last year, the Ontario Court of Appeal heard evidence that the original autopsy conclusions allowed for a time of death much later than that cited by the prosecution, perhaps a day later, when Mr. Truscott was in school.

"The conviction, placed in the light of the fresh evidence, constitutes a miscarriage of justice and must be quashed," the court said in a unanimous judgment.

It is hard enough to figure out what "fair and reasonable" is for a broken arm or lost eye. We do it, not because it is perfect, but because it is the best system we have to make one whole.

But 10 years taken away from one's life, and being haunted by the conviction for an additional 38 years? More from the article:

The Ontario attorney general, Michael Bryant, said he would not appeal and asked a judge to advise on compensation. "On behalf of the government, I am truly sorry," Mr. Bryant said.

I'm curious as to what others think, assuming this blog is still being read in the waning days of August...

Labels: Personal Injury

posted by Eric Turkewitz
Permanent Link

Comments:

A life wasted. And I saw from the link he had to live under an assumed name due to the notoriety of the case in Canada. It's hard to imagine a proper valuation, but if the negligence was really bad, you might look at $5-10M, though I see no way the government gives him that.

# posted by  Anonymous : August 30, 2007 12:04 PM

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

<$BlogBacklinkTitle$>  
<$BlogBacklinkSnippet$>

posted by <$BlogBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>

Create a Link

<< Home

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.