PROSECUTOR Leo McGuigan's capacity to distort a simple conversation and to produce what he portrays as proof of Morin's guilt, is mind-numbing. A conversation between Morin and concerned citizen Mandy Paterson, illustrates the fact. According to McGuigan, Morin told suspicious "sleuth" Mandy Paterson that Christine died on the day she was abducted, October 3, 1984. This "lead" prompted McGuigan to dramatically assert;

Ladies and gentlemen, when the forensic pathologists, anthropologists and police cannot say for sure when she was murdered, how can that man who sits in that box know that. Only two people could have known that. The killer and Christine Jessop.11

This dramatic presentation is certainly a powerful addendum to the suggestion that the prosecution is always right and always credible, but on close examination, it is simply a distortion of the evidence. In fact, the testimony provided by Paterson in 1986 suggests the exact opposite of this dramatic, McGuigan assertion. In 1986 according to Paterson, Morin had claimed that Christine's body "was too badly decomposed to tell" if she had been sexually assaulted.12 Consequently, if we apply the McGuigan tactic to a simple conversation between Paterson and Morin, it is important to acknowledge the following;

Ladies and Gentlemen, if that man who sits in that box, has to rely upon forensic pathologists, anthropologists and the police to tell him about the circumstances surrounding Christine Jessop's murder, how can we stand here today and accuse him when he is clearly ignorant of information that only the killer or killers possess.

McGuigan's tendency to twist and turn in a manner which acknowledges the reverse of what is evidently credible, may be dramatic enough to manipulate an unsuspecting jury, but that is all. His tactics do not withstand the scrutiny of an objective analysis. When Morin told Mandy Paterson that he could not conclusively determine whether Christine Jessop had been sexually assaulted, he clearly echoed, not the knowledge of a murderer but the determination of chief forensic pathologist, Dr. Hillsdon-Smith, who noted;

Due to the state of decomposition of the body and attacks on the body by animals, it could not be said from observations of the body whether acts of sexual intercourse had taken place.13

Ironically, it is the Crown's contention that Christine Jessop had been sexually assaulted, which potentially contradicts forensic pathology evidence.

The testimony of well-intentioned witnesses like Mandy Paterson was thoroughly twisted and manipulated to fit in with the Crown contention that Morin is a callous, uncaring killer. When, for example Morin did not respond to Mandy's questions in a manner which she deemed to be appropriate she claimed that Morin "sounded like he didn't care... like it happened every day."14 And the only thing that Morin had said to provoke this assessment was; "Things like that happen. What can you do? She was a sweet, innocent little girl."

Morin may not wear his sleeve on his shoulder in public, but Mandy's assessment evidently rests more on ignorance than on facts. The most horrendous, repulsive, disgusting, brutal crimes and injustices imagineable are indeed a daily occurrence, and if Mandy has her head buried in the sand, it is her problem, not Morin's fault. Having just finished reading a local community newspaper this afternoon, one of the stories dealt with a 30-year old woman who was abducted, beaten, raped and abandoned in afield where she was stung by over two hundred bees.15 "Things like that happen. What can you do?" For starters, hang the guilty pervert, not the peculiar neighbour who shocks the self-righteous, "middle class" sensibilities of people like Mandy Paterson.  

11The Toronto Star, 19/7/92.
12Globe and Mail, 17/1/86.
13Globe and Mail, 23/1/86.
14Toronto Sun, 17/1/86.
15The Liberal, 30/8/92. p.13






Thanks for the message