Crazy doesn't mean guilty, Jessop jury told
Defence pleads for 'quietly schizophrenic' musician in trial summation
Why are innocent men repeatedly convicted.
Why are innocent men repeatedly convicted.

Clayton Ruby is supposed to be one of the best lawyers in Canada but he sealed the fate of his own client when he called him crazy. How can that be? The bottom line is, Egotistical Prosecutors and Egotistical Lawyers like Leo McGuican and Clay Ruby, act like justice is the employer of incompetent people.

How could somebody with the reputation of Clayton Ruby possibly engage the systematic injustice that is responsible for the conviction of Guy Paul Morin and remain silent all these years?

I used to have enormous respect for this Canadian lawyer who specializes in constitutional and criminal law and civil rights. Is he not one of the most famous lawyers in Canada at present, having served as a defence lawyer in a number of high-profile cases? True enough, but there is only one lawyer that I know of, who deserves to be called the best lawyer that Canada has ever produced, his name is Michael Lomer, and that's the point of this website; to set the record straight.

Michael Lomer fought 14 years to finally prove the innocence of William Mullins-Johnson, what has Clayton Ruby ever done to deserve greater fame? The truth is, he and the prosecutor are responsible for the murder conviction of an innocent man, and that's what I call "CRAZY" !

In the final analysis, when it comes to the Justice System, he was absolutely correct in the following sense; "You are listening to someone with a communication disorder and a thinking disorder", the words Clayton Ruby ironically applied to his assessment of Guy Paul Morin.

The thing I used to admire about Clayton Ruby is that he always appeared to make good sense and he always spoke with conviction. And so, on November 1, 1990, I wrote the following letter which is essentially the beginning of the end of my infatuation with Clayton Ruby.

Dear Mr. Ruby:

I was extremely surprised and disturbed by the Supreme Court decision to allow an appeal in the Morin case. Unless the media has reported nothing but the most frivolous evidence which relates to the case, I cannot avoid the belief that the evidently emotional drive to convict Morin, reflects an abhorrent miscarriage of justice. The process of arresting someone and then trying to produce evidence to justify confinement is such a vulgar proposition that it insults every measure of decency, reason and justice. The Supreme Court of Canada is supposed to defend, not to make a mockery of ordinary human rights, and when the presumption of innocence is perverted by a general, authoritative willingness to assume the worst, justice is extremely elusive.

One of the most appalling suggestions of the Morin case is the prosecution claim that psychiatric evidence could have been used to connect Morin to the murder... Theoretical testimony of experts who claim that Morin is capable of murder is relatively meaningless [in their eyes, every sloppy thinker is schizophrenic]. Experts who view the world through theoretical convictions ignore the more significant individual reality. Even Freud, the father of psychoanalysis was so dogmatic that he deliberately suppressed the truths which disputed his theories. Freud was evidently so overzealous that he routinely and deliberately lied because he was more concerned about the reputation of his theories than he was about the truth. Unfortunately, most people are not as even-handed and as rational as genuinely reputable psychoanalysts like Eric Fromm, who apply logic and reason to theory.

Obviously, with so many unknown variables, I cannot assess the guilt or the innocence of Morin. But from everything which has thus far been exposed in the media, reliable evidence which even remotely suggests that Morin is guilty does not exist. My intuition consequently suggests that Morin is a scapegoat and reports that he was nervous at his trial suggest that he is a normal human being, not a cold-hearted, masterful murderer.

When I studied abnormal psychology in university I learned that instances of abnormal behavior reflect, in the majority of cases, behavior which is maladaptive rather than bizarre. The belief that abnormal behavior is bizarre [and causing somebody to be capable of murder] is a common misconception which ignores the fact that even the behavior of psychologically disturbed people is, in the majority of instances, within the bounds of ordinary, understandable, human experience. A brief, psychological analysis, like intelligence tests, do not provide reliable evidence because they ignore the scope of the human condition and that, in the final analysis, dictates the realm of human potential.

Certainly, if there is evidence to suggest insanity, Morin requires treatment and the appeal is legitimate. But that should be determined by evidence, not by theoretical speculation...

My letter was ignored, but that is not surprising -read this and you ought to understand.

Morin was found to be guilty of first-degree murder on July 23, 1992.

I am an expert who has studied wrongful convictions. Clayton Ruby evidently did not have the benefit of my insight. It is nonetheless important for all involved in the administration of justice to be educated, with respect to the 119 recommendations that the false conviction of Guy Paul Morin generated. In particular, I stress the following recommendations because they obviously reflect the wrongdoing/ignorance which is responsible for this particular, miscarriage of justice:

Recommendation 60: Crown Education respecting informers

The Ministry of the Attorney General should commit financial and human resources to ensure that prosecutors are fully educated and trained as to in-custody informers. Such educational programming should fully familiarize all Crown attorneys with the Crown policies respecting in-custody informers and appropriate methods of dealing with, and assessing the reliability of, such informers.

Recommendation 63: Access of police officers to correctional facilities

The Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services should ensure that a record is invariably kept of police (and other) attendances at any provincial correctional institute. The sensitivity of a particular atendance may affect what, if any, access is given to such a record, but that should not obviate the necessity for its invariable existence.

Recommendation 64: Placement of inmates

An accused and another inmate should not be placed together to facilitate the collection of evidence against the accused, where that placement violates institutional placement policies. In other words, the police should not encourage correctional authorities to permit an inappropriate placement to facilitate the collection of evidence. Where a placement is requested, the request should be recorded, together with the reasons stated and the identity of the requesting party.

The most sweeping recommendation proposed the development of an educational program directed to police officers, to prosecutors, to the Criminal Lawyers Association, to Ontario Law Schools, to the Law Society of Upper Canada and to the judiciary. The educational program was to address the known or suspected causes of wrongful convictions and how all concerned parties (lawyers, prosecutors, police, etc.) may contribute to their prevention. Needless to say, if all parties were educated, as I am, regarding known causes of wrongful convictions, the investigation regarding the guilt or innocence of Guy Paul Morin would have preceded his arrest.


The legal system is second to none, when it comes to the task of inappropriately labelling people.  

 
 
 
MailComments - Questions? -
 

 
NEWSWORLD SHOWDOWN
Copyright 2011
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 


Look who's talking

It's not CNN, it's not CNBC, it's not NBC, it's not Fox.


Message Board -Click Here !

Follow matwilson6 on Twitter

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Please share your thoughts here