Scott Peterson Trial: Timeline
|
Guy Paul Morin: Innocent until proven guiltyI used to believe that Clayton Ruby was Canada’s crusader for social justice. I guess I was
influenced by the media. He was always on television, and he always appeared to root for
the underdog.
The thing I liked best about Clayton Ruby is that he always appeared to make good sense
and he always spoke with conviction. I admired the man, and 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. I only hope that justice prevails, and if it were not for the privilege of having
an exceptional lawyer, I am afraid that it probably would not.
I wrote that letter about the decision to re-try an innocent man on November 1, 1990, and
every word still rings true, except for the suggestion that Guy Paul Morin had an
exceptional lawyer.
In retrospect, I believe that Guy Paul Morin had a crafty lawyer, and the Supreme Court
decision was merely an implicit statement like “we are not going to allow crafty lawyers
to decide criminal cases.” At the same time, I believe the Supreme Court erred in its
decision to allow a new trial, because it is equally wrong to say, “if we allow the
prosecution to be equally crafty, we will level the dirty tricks, playing field.”
Justice should be about the pursuit of the truth, not a contest to determine who is craftier,
and in that respect, everything about the Guy Paul Morin trial, stinks. Guy Paul Morin
was initially acquitted because the defence proved to be crafty, he was later convicted
because the prosecution to be just as crafty, and he spent 10 years of his life in prison,
while all the idiots who put him there continued to do what they always do -abuse the
process because they are too incompetent to get it right.
The same types of lawyers, prosecutors and psychologists who are responsible for the
fraudulent conviction of Guy Paul Morin are still in business and they quietly pervert
justice every single day. These prosecutors and defence attorneys who do little more than
manipulate psychological opinions, distort reality, their actions are repugnant and
reprehensible and they should all be forced to find employment more suitable to people
who have not spent enough time developing their intellect.
I wrote The Trial because I was outraged by the arrest and conviction of an innocent man,
and I think it was all in vain because nothing has changed. I hope that someone
somewhere, is able to learn something from it, and please post a message on this message
board, if you do.
Looking back, I can say that my research surrounding the Guy Paul Morin case has
influenced my thinking in the following way. I no longer believe in probable cause.
Probable cause is code for, “I am too stupid to figure it out.” Our jails are filled with
innocent people because some moron who thinks that probable cause is the capacity to
manipulate authorities and abuse the system, is perverting justice. We are living what I
would call, “gag order” justice, and I don’t know why any Judge anywhere in the world,
would condone this mess.
I hope you can learn something from The Trial. I have certainly learned a great deal by
studying the preposterous arrest of Guy Paul Morin. Tragically, another innocent man,
Sean Hine, would have also been arrested, tried and convicted and he would have
probably spend the rest of his life in jail if the real murderer did not confess. We are a
society that relies upon the testimony of murderers to free innocent people, and that
makes us absolutely pathetic, in terms of the general capacity to solve crime.
Read The Trial, and I think you will have a better understand about how the process fails to work.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
