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

Guy Paul Morin was represented by Clayton Ruby, who was supposed to be one of the best lawyers in Canada, sealed the fate of his own client when he called him crazy.

Ruby was a Canadian lawyer who specialized in constitutional and criminal law and civil rights, and along with prosecutor, Leo McGuican, is absolutely responsible for messing up the trial which produced a bizarre and inexcusable conviction.

Indeed, the fate of Guy Paul Morin was essentially determined when the prosecution exploited Clayton Ruby's statement, "You are listening to someone with a communication disorder and a thinking disorder." In retrospect, his words applied, not to murder suspect, Guy Paul Morin, but to the people who are responsible for engineering his conviction.

There was a time when I greatly admired Clayton because he always appeared to make good sense and spoke with conviction. That all changed when I noted his handling of the Morin case and on November 1, 1990, I therefore sent him a letter urging him to do everything he possibly could to prevent a miscarriage of justice in the making. This is what I wrote:

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 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.

Morin was subsequently found to be guilty of first-degree murder on July 23, 1992, thanks to Canada's legal profession.

I have studied wrongful convictions and there is no excuse for the failure to prevent them. Clearly, it is vital and important for all involved in the administration of justice to be better educated and to reject the glaring abuse and prejudices that are responsible for the conviction of Guy Paul Morin because they are very common and easy to identify.

The collection of unreliable "evidence" which is responsible for manufacturing the false narrative that convicted Guy Paul Morin is as disgusting as the exoneration of Kyle Rittenhouse in the US. It is therefore the obligation of Canada's Ministry of the Attorney General to commit financial and human resources not to ensure prosecution but to secure a just result. After all, the false conviction of Guy Paul Morin produced sweeping recommendation to improve the educational programs 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. But where is the evidence that general educational inadequacy has been eliminated? In fact, it not only does not exist, the opportunity to convict the innocent has been enhanced and that is absolutely unacceptable.

Next: Why Frank Kafka was right.


Look who's talking

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

Message Board -Click Here !




Message Board