WHAT MOTIVATES Leo McGuigan, a fiercely "honourable" man who is well known for his capacity to prosecute? Whatever it is, it certainly is not the drive to discover the whole truth. His record is very clear. The only indisputable is a fierce, relentless determination to prosecute. Ironically, Mr. McGuigan's talents are responsible for the fact that he can be either good or bad, depending upon the defining circumstances; good when a particular defendant is in fact guilty, bad when he prosecutes an innocent person. If Mr. McGuigan fails to uphold the integrity of his position, it is because he has evidently decided to presume that every suspect is guilty and that every investigative impropriety is simply, to use one of his favourite arguments, a "red herring" .What McGuigan ultimately promotes, when he assumes that every suspect is guilty and every authority is beyond reproach, is an "on demand" capacity to pervert justice.
If anyone is directly aware of the potential to pervert justice, it should be Leo McGuigan. In 1982, he was responsible for convicting Neil Proverbs, and that was atrial that put the entire justice system under an embarrassing spotlight. The judicial corruption allegations that the Proverbs case recorded, are staggering. Proverbs set out to defend himself against a weapons charge by proving that the police officers who testified against him had lied, so he established an elaborate "sting" operation which produced 37 hours of secretly recorded videotape. The tapes effectively put the credibility of the entire justice system under a microscope, and even a common unspeakable like judicial corruption, became a subject of scrutiny. Evidence which included the recorded testimony of police officers discussing and bragging about their abilities to lie convincingly, do not exactly reinforce faith in the justice system. The authorities made light of these so-called tales of judicial corruption and repeatedly suggested that they were mere fictions, but these "denials " clearly lacked credibility. Neil Proverbs was facing a charge of possessing a weapon dangerous to the public peace, and videotaped evidence recorded Sergeant George Reynolds advising Proverbs on how to beat the rap. According to Reynolds, the idea is not to deny police evidence, because the police tend to be believed, but to "blunt" and "circumvent" it.4 These tapes, which actually show police officers practicing the corruption they preached, are evidently too substantial to erroneously dismiss. Officers who counsel an accused criminal on how to fabricate evidence or to create "believable" stories in order to evade criminal prosecution, demonstrate extreme contempt for the legitimate administration of justice. Indeed, according to the philosophy that Sergeant George Reynolds promoted, a criminal verdict is evaded or secured through the coordinated, manipulative capacity to "explain away" legitimate evidence. Yet Leo McGuigan simply called all evidence of corruption, a "red herring." And so he successfully convicted Neil Proverbs. And so he successfully convicted Guy Paul Morin. And all the legitimate evidence which suggested that Guy Pau Morin was not guilty was simply "explained away".
Thanks for the message