The jurors in the Wilton Smith trial asked some critical questions of the trial judge, Justice Ewaschuk. However, the answers they received in response points to the inescapable conclusion that Wilton Smith did not have a fair trial and that his conviction for first degree murder was and remains a miscarriage of justice.
In an effort to illustrate the unfairness of the trial which resulted in Wilton Smith's conviction for first degree murder I will reproduce verbatim the questions asked by the jury and the answers provided. Where it is helpful to illustrate the unfairness of the trial process I will also quote various statements by the trial judge during his discussions with counsel. In this piece I will focus on two questions. I will in a later piece address the other questions.
Question
by jury:
How did Joseph Pryce Testimony
Came to be found ?
Answer by
trial judge (Justice Ewaschuk):
"There is no evidence in the case as to how the police came to know that Joseph Pryce may have had - may have known something relevant about the case. The only evidence is that Detective Bronson found Joseph Pryce. Joseph Pryce did not call the police. He was surprised at their arrival. That's the answer to number three."
Question
by jury:
At what time in relation to the
murder of Miss Innis did the machete
sharpening take place ?
Answer by
trial judge(Justice Ewaschuk):
"Joseph Pryce's initial testimony here was that he was not sure when the man came with the machete. Next he testified that the man may have come when it wasn't warm out and you needed a jacket. He said it may have been six months before the police arrived on January 6th, 1993. That's the date Detective Bronson interviewed him, January 6th, 1993. Still later he testified that the man came with the machete maybe one to three weeks before he saw the black/white profile of the man on television. That's the evidence."
There you have it. Two crucial questions from the jury and the answers provided by the trial judge. In the next issue I will analyze these answers and some of the comments of the trial jduge during the exchanges with counsel on how the questions will be answered.
Note: This publication is written for the sole purpose of drawing attention on a matter of public importance. Democracy and the rule of law works best when ideas and information is freely exchanged.
In an effort to illustrate the unfairness of the trial which resulted in Wilton Smith's conviction for first degree murder I will reproduce verbatim the questions asked by the jury and the answers provided. Where it is helpful to illustrate the unfairness of the trial process I will also quote various statements by the trial judge during his discussions with counsel. In this piece I will focus on two questions. I will in a later piece address the other questions.
Question
by jury:
How did Joseph Pryce Testimony
Came to be found ?
Answer by
trial judge (Justice Ewaschuk):
"There is no evidence in the case as to how the police came to know that Joseph Pryce may have had - may have known something relevant about the case. The only evidence is that Detective Bronson found Joseph Pryce. Joseph Pryce did not call the police. He was surprised at their arrival. That's the answer to number three."
Question
by jury:
At what time in relation to the
murder of Miss Innis did the machete
sharpening take place ?
Answer by
trial judge(Justice Ewaschuk):
"Joseph Pryce's initial testimony here was that he was not sure when the man came with the machete. Next he testified that the man may have come when it wasn't warm out and you needed a jacket. He said it may have been six months before the police arrived on January 6th, 1993. That's the date Detective Bronson interviewed him, January 6th, 1993. Still later he testified that the man came with the machete maybe one to three weeks before he saw the black/white profile of the man on television. That's the evidence."
There you have it. Two crucial questions from the jury and the answers provided by the trial judge. In the next issue I will analyze these answers and some of the comments of the trial jduge during the exchanges with counsel on how the questions will be answered.
Note: This publication is written for the sole purpose of drawing attention on a matter of public importance. Democracy and the rule of law works best when ideas and information is freely exchanged.
