Guy Paul Morin: justice fails
Created | Updated Jul 31, 2013
History of the Crime and Police Investigation
Christine Jessop, a nine-year old girl who lived in Queensville Ontario, was dropped off by her school bus at her home on October 3rd, 1984. Her mother was not at home when Christine arrived in the afternoon. Her mother did arrive home at approximately 4:30 PM only to find no sign of their daughter except for her backpack in kitchen. Her mother also noticed that the mail and newspapers had been brought in from the mailbox as was customary for her daughter to do. With panic, her mother scoured the neighbourhood looking for any sign of their daughter, but did not turn up any sign of her. It was only at about 8:00 PM that same day that Janet, Christine’s mother called the York Regional Police. Only minutes later, a whole police investigation team was sent to the Jessop residence, including emergency vehicles, seventeen police officers, and the K-9 unit. The police searched rigorously for clues in Christine’s disappearance. Such an investigation included questioning members of the community. Constable McGowan, a police investigator, went next door to the Morin residence and while conversing with Mrs. Morin noted that Guy Paul sat silently and looked forward.
The police vigorously searched the Jessop residence, however there was no attempt made to preserve the house as a prospective crime scene. Local residents were called by Ms. Jessop to help assist in searching for Christine. Several dozen people helped by scouring the local parks and areas where Christine could have been. During the search by residents and officers, Inspector Wilson noticed Christine’s bike in a shed with its kick stand broken. However, no prints were taken of the bike and nothing was done to secure the location. Officers also noted that Christine’s pink jacket was on a hook she could not have possibly reached. Later when a fingerprint analyst came to look at both the jacket and the bike, the jacket had been removed from the hook and was lying on a table. The analyst made no attempt to print any other items in the Jessop house and even after Christine had been missing for several months, no further fingerprinting was done. Unfortunately, due to environmental conditions, future fingerprints taken from the residence would only be partials and many would possibly belong to the inspectors and officers who went through her room.
In the early hours of October 4th, 1984, Sergeant Rick McCabe, subsequently awoke Ken Jessop, Christine’s fourteen-year-old brother. At 2:00 AM he was asked to provide a written statement about what had gone on the previous day. This statement was later lost by the sergeant, which was one of many future flaws in the police investigation. Interestingly, there was wild speculation throughout the whole investigation that Ken Jessop and some of his friends may have been having sexual relations with Christine before she disappeared. At the same time, there was increased scrutiny on Janet Jessop because her husband Bob Jessop was incarcerated at the time and since she had a calm demeanor. Police investigators warned her that she could be charged with public mischief if she knew where her daughter was and was only using her as a ploy to try and get her husband released earlier.
The following morning, the K-9 unit began its part in the investigation. Constable Robertson of the K-9 unit allowed his dog to sniff the Jessop residence, but later his dog lead him to the driveway of the Morin’s. It was here where Constable Robertson’s dog noted something of interest by placing its hands on the passenger side window of Guy Paul Morin’s car.
On December 31st, 1984, the missing person case of Christine Jessop ended with the positive identification of her body on Ravenshoe Road approximately 56 kilometers from her residence. The case was now a murder investigation. A coroner determined that her body had been lying along the road between three and four months.
One of the inspectors, John Shephard, noted on February 20th, 1985, that he suspected Morin. However, Morin was not even questioned until February 22nd of that year. After the discovery of animal fibers on Christine Jessop and in the car of Guy Paul Morin, the police had enough evidence to obtain an arrest warrant for Morin. On April 22nd, 1985, Morin was arrested and later charged with the murder of Christine Jessop despite proclaiming his innocence throughout the six hour long interrogation. The same night, a warrant was obtained to search the Morin residence and several dozen items were seized including his Honda. Guy Paul Morin volunteered hair, salvia, and blood samples and forensic scientists concluded that Guy Paul Morin’s hair matched those on Christine Jessop’s necklace.
Important People
Guy Paul Morin
Guy Paul Morin was the twenty-two-year old next door neighbour of the Jessop family, who lived in Queensville, Ontario with his parents. Morin was employed by a furniture manufacturer. He had immense musical talent and enjoyed playing the clarinet and sax. He was arrested and charged with the murder of Christine Jessop, but always proclaimed his innocence.
Christine Jessop
Christine Jessop was a nine-year old, grade four student at Queensville Public School. She disappeared in the afternoon of October 3rd, 1984 after returning home from school. She was later found dead on December 31st, 1984 in a ditch 56 kilometers from her house.
The Trial
(The following information is paraphrased from: National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, “The Ordeal of Guy Paul Morin: Canada Copes With Systemic Injustice”, www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/championarticles/19980808?opendocument, Apr. 17, 2005.)
Following the discovery of Christine Jessop’s body, Guy Paul Morin was immediately the prime suspect in the police investigation despite official statements by the police that stated anyone in Queensway was a suspect. Subsequently, he was arrested and charged with the murder of his next door neighbour.
Due to a press conference during which the police superintendent said that Morin’s psychological profile matched that of the killers, the trial was relocated to London, Ontario.
Morin, represented by Clayton Ruby and Mary Bartley, started his first trial on January 7th, 1986. At the trial John Scott and Susan MacLean, the Crown prosecutors, attempted to prove that on October 3rd, 1984 Guy Paul Morin lured Christine into his car then drove to Ravenshoe Road where he proceed to sexually assault her.
During the trial, the Crown attempted to prove the defendant’s guilt by producing samples of hair found both in Morin’s house and in his car, allegedly matching the hair samples taken from Christine’s body. They also brought forth the testimony of both an undercover officer and that of a fellow inmate which alleged that while in custody Morin made statements that showed his guilt of the crime. However, due to the circumstantial nature of this evidence and the alibi offered by the defence, the jury found him not-guilty.
The Crown appealed on the grounds that the judge gave the jury wrongful charge in that he directed them to apply the standard of reasonable doubt to individual pieces of evidence in addition to the overall case. They also argued that the evidence as pertaining to the psychiatric condition of Morin was not admissible as it was evidence to support a claim of insanity and therefore had no bearing on the case since the defence was not claiming temporary insanity. In light of these facts the appellant court threw out the previous jury’s verdict and ordered a new trial on June 5th, 1987.
Morin appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada in order to get the Court of Appeal’s decision thrown out. While the Supreme Court agreed that the psychiatric evidence was not reason enough for a second trial, they upheld the appellant courts decision stating that the judge’s charge to the jury was cause enough to order a new trial.
The defence attempted to obtain a motion to stay the proceedings on the grounds that certain pieces of evidence were either not disclosed or else wrongfully disclosed during disclosure. However, this motion was rejected on the grounds that the issues with disclosure will be dealt with during the trial.
On November 13th, 1991 the second trial of Guy Paul Morin began. The trial lasted nine months and had testimony from over 120 witnesses. During this time, the defence showed that it would have been impossible for Guy Paul to commit the crime by establishing the alibi. The Crown vehemently argued the family had made up the alibi to allow Morin to get away with murder.
On July 23rd, 1992, after a week of deliberations, the jury came back with a guilty verdict and Guy Paul Morin subsequently received a sentence of life imprisonment. The defence immediately filed an appeal, but even while it was being processed a re-examination of the body found DNA evidence that had been overlooked that clearly proved Guy Paul Morin’s innocence.
On January 23rd, 1995 Morin was finally released from jail and had his criminal record changed to indicate a directed acquittal. Following a commission into his wrongful conviction, Guy Paul Morin received a settlement of $1.25 million, yet little could be done to compensate him for the time he lost after spending more than ten years in prison.
Important Legal Issues
The main legal issues that were brought up in relation to this case are the address to the jury, and the admittance of a psychological report prepared by the Crown based on the examination Morin had given during his trial.
One of the issues that arose was that there was a report that was based on Guy Paul’s answers during his previous examination, a report which the crown wanted to introduce in affidavit form. This was disallowed by the Court as it was seen as new evidence.
The second and more grave of the issues which arose was the Judge’s address to the jury. In it the judge directed the jury to apply the standard of proof of “beyond a reasonable doubt” twice, once when looking at each individual piece of evidence, and again when looking at the whole case. The Crown argued that applying this standard twice would destroy any evidence they had for the evidence was to fit together and so should be seen as a finished product. It further argued that the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” applied only to the determination of guilt on the part of the defendant and not when deterring the authenticity of evidence.
The Impact of the Case on Society at the Time
Canadian society was generally horrified and infuriated when it was brought about that there had been a great deal of tampering with the evidence to make it look as though Guy Paul had committed the crime. It was impossible for individuals to come to grips with the fact that those police officers who had framed him wee still in active duty and had had no sanctions raised against them. Much of Canadian society was in an uproar and demanded accountability on the part of the police, forensic investigators, and the Crown. The case reaffirmed the general belief that serious overhauls needed to be made to police procedure, evidence collecting, and overall legal etiquette.
Guy Paul lost eleven years in prison for a crime he did not commit, for a crime he was framed for. It is unknown to this day why the police officers in the investigation wanted to frame Guy Paul with the murder of Christine Jessop. It is possible that they thought they would need to catch the perpetrator in order to prevent public anger at their inefficiency. Perhaps the case had seemed unsolvable and so they were resolved to have it closed. Or perhaps these actions have deeper roots and deeper pockets still; perhaps Guy Paul was to go to jail to allow the real killer to walk free.
It is a tragedy that such blatant disregard for the justice system was shown by those who would enforce it, yet, there have been no reproductions for any of the officers involved in the case and to this day nothing has been done to reprimand them.
Placement in the Annals of Legal History
The wrongful conviction of Guy Paul Morin has forever belonged in the annals of legal history as evidence that wrongful convictions are prevalent in any justice system. The conviction of Guy Paul Morin was based purely on contaminated evidence, circumstantial evidence, poor and unreliable testimony, and poor police work. After this case, the forensic science and police investigation community have been called upon to create stricter regulations. After Guy Paul Morin’s exoneration, a report made jointly by Canadian prosecutors and police officers made over forty recommendations including, “stricter guidelines on the use of often unreliable prison sources, better education for police and prosecutors on a range of issues, fostering a workplace culture that encourages questions, tightened investigative procedures and allowing defence lawyers to have forensic evidence tested independently”.
In many countries, including the United States, the debate over the death penalty has been resurged by the developments of Guy Paul Morin’s exoneration due to DNA tests, poor detective work, and improper forensic practices. As noted, the case of Guy Paul Morin showed the flaws of the justice system. Had this man been in a country which practiced capital punishment, he would have been facing the possibility of the death penalty. The flaw of justice that existed in the case of Guy Paul Morin has forever haunted those in the judicial system and has strengthened the argument of death penalty abolitionists throughout the world. The death penalty should be abolished out of fear that dozens of innocent lives are being put at risk. Overall, there was and still is a large concern over the notable fundamental flaws in judicial practices that have been brought to light through cases, such as the one involving Guy Paul Morin.
Christine Jessop, a nine-year old girl who lived in Queensville Ontario, was dropped off by her school bus at her home on October 3rd, 1984. Her mother was not at home when Christine arrived in the afternoon. Her mother did arrive home at approximately 4:30 PM only to find no sign of their daughter except for her backpack in kitchen. Her mother also noticed that the mail and newspapers had been brought in from the mailbox as was customary for her daughter to do. With panic, her mother scoured the neighbourhood looking for any sign of their daughter, but did not turn up any sign of her. It was only at about 8:00 PM that same day that Janet, Christine’s mother called the York Regional Police. Only minutes later, a whole police investigation team was sent to the Jessop residence, including emergency vehicles, seventeen police officers, and the K-9 unit. The police searched rigorously for clues in Christine’s disappearance. Such an investigation included questioning members of the community. Constable McGowan, a police investigator, went next door to the Morin residence and while conversing with Mrs. Morin noted that Guy Paul sat silently and looked forward.
The police vigorously searched the Jessop residence, however there was no attempt made to preserve the house as a prospective crime scene. Local residents were called by Ms. Jessop to help assist in searching for Christine. Several dozen people helped by scouring the local parks and areas where Christine could have been. During the search by residents and officers, Inspector Wilson noticed Christine’s bike in a shed with its kick stand broken. However, no prints were taken of the bike and nothing was done to secure the location. Officers also noted that Christine’s pink jacket was on a hook she could not have possibly reached. Later when a fingerprint analyst came to look at both the jacket and the bike, the jacket had been removed from the hook and was lying on a table. The analyst made no attempt to print any other items in the Jessop house and even after Christine had been missing for several months, no further fingerprinting was done. Unfortunately, due to environmental conditions, future fingerprints taken from the residence would only be partials and many would possibly belong to the inspectors and officers who went through her room.
In the early hours of October 4th, 1984, Sergeant Rick McCabe, subsequently awoke Ken Jessop, Christine’s fourteen-year-old brother. At 2:00 AM he was asked to provide a written statement about what had gone on the previous day. This statement was later lost by the sergeant, which was one of many future flaws in the police investigation. Interestingly, there was wild speculation throughout the whole investigation that Ken Jessop and some of his friends may have been having sexual relations with Christine before she disappeared. At the same time, there was increased scrutiny on Janet Jessop because her husband Bob Jessop was incarcerated at the time and since she had a calm demeanor. Police investigators warned her that she could be charged with public mischief if she knew where her daughter was and was only using her as a ploy to try and get her husband released earlier.
The following morning, the K-9 unit began its part in the investigation. Constable Robertson of the K-9 unit allowed his dog to sniff the Jessop residence, but later his dog lead him to the driveway of the Morin’s. It was here where Constable Robertson’s dog noted something of interest by placing its hands on the passenger side window of Guy Paul Morin’s car.
On December 31st, 1984, the missing person case of Christine Jessop ended with the positive identification of her body on Ravenshoe Road approximately 56 kilometers from her residence. The case was now a murder investigation. A coroner determined that her body had been lying along the road between three and four months.
One of the inspectors, John Shephard, noted on February 20th, 1985, that he suspected Morin. However, Morin was not even questioned until February 22nd of that year. After the discovery of animal fibers on Christine Jessop and in the car of Guy Paul Morin, the police had enough evidence to obtain an arrest warrant for Morin. On April 22nd, 1985, Morin was arrested and later charged with the murder of Christine Jessop despite proclaiming his innocence throughout the six hour long interrogation. The same night, a warrant was obtained to search the Morin residence and several dozen items were seized including his Honda. Guy Paul Morin volunteered hair, salvia, and blood samples and forensic scientists concluded that Guy Paul Morin’s hair matched those on Christine Jessop’s necklace.
Important People
Guy Paul Morin
Guy Paul Morin was the twenty-two-year old next door neighbour of the Jessop family, who lived in Queensville, Ontario with his parents. Morin was employed by a furniture manufacturer. He had immense musical talent and enjoyed playing the clarinet and sax. He was arrested and charged with the murder of Christine Jessop, but always proclaimed his innocence.
Christine Jessop
Christine Jessop was a nine-year old, grade four student at Queensville Public School. She disappeared in the afternoon of October 3rd, 1984 after returning home from school. She was later found dead on December 31st, 1984 in a ditch 56 kilometers from her house.
The Trial
(The following information is paraphrased from: National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, “The Ordeal of Guy Paul Morin: Canada Copes With Systemic Injustice”, www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/championarticles/19980808?opendocument, Apr. 17, 2005.)
Following the discovery of Christine Jessop’s body, Guy Paul Morin was immediately the prime suspect in the police investigation despite official statements by the police that stated anyone in Queensway was a suspect. Subsequently, he was arrested and charged with the murder of his next door neighbour.
Due to a press conference during which the police superintendent said that Morin’s psychological profile matched that of the killers, the trial was relocated to London, Ontario.
Morin, represented by Clayton Ruby and Mary Bartley, started his first trial on January 7th, 1986. At the trial John Scott and Susan MacLean, the Crown prosecutors, attempted to prove that on October 3rd, 1984 Guy Paul Morin lured Christine into his car then drove to Ravenshoe Road where he proceed to sexually assault her.
During the trial, the Crown attempted to prove the defendant’s guilt by producing samples of hair found both in Morin’s house and in his car, allegedly matching the hair samples taken from Christine’s body. They also brought forth the testimony of both an undercover officer and that of a fellow inmate which alleged that while in custody Morin made statements that showed his guilt of the crime. However, due to the circumstantial nature of this evidence and the alibi offered by the defence, the jury found him not-guilty.
The Crown appealed on the grounds that the judge gave the jury wrongful charge in that he directed them to apply the standard of reasonable doubt to individual pieces of evidence in addition to the overall case. They also argued that the evidence as pertaining to the psychiatric condition of Morin was not admissible as it was evidence to support a claim of insanity and therefore had no bearing on the case since the defence was not claiming temporary insanity. In light of these facts the appellant court threw out the previous jury’s verdict and ordered a new trial on June 5th, 1987.
Morin appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada in order to get the Court of Appeal’s decision thrown out. While the Supreme Court agreed that the psychiatric evidence was not reason enough for a second trial, they upheld the appellant courts decision stating that the judge’s charge to the jury was cause enough to order a new trial.
The defence attempted to obtain a motion to stay the proceedings on the grounds that certain pieces of evidence were either not disclosed or else wrongfully disclosed during disclosure. However, this motion was rejected on the grounds that the issues with disclosure will be dealt with during the trial.
On November 13th, 1991 the second trial of Guy Paul Morin began. The trial lasted nine months and had testimony from over 120 witnesses. During this time, the defence showed that it would have been impossible for Guy Paul to commit the crime by establishing the alibi. The Crown vehemently argued the family had made up the alibi to allow Morin to get away with murder.
On July 23rd, 1992, after a week of deliberations, the jury came back with a guilty verdict and Guy Paul Morin subsequently received a sentence of life imprisonment. The defence immediately filed an appeal, but even while it was being processed a re-examination of the body found DNA evidence that had been overlooked that clearly proved Guy Paul Morin’s innocence.
On January 23rd, 1995 Morin was finally released from jail and had his criminal record changed to indicate a directed acquittal. Following a commission into his wrongful conviction, Guy Paul Morin received a settlement of $1.25 million, yet little could be done to compensate him for the time he lost after spending more than ten years in prison.
Important Legal Issues
The main legal issues that were brought up in relation to this case are the address to the jury, and the admittance of a psychological report prepared by the Crown based on the examination Morin had given during his trial.
One of the issues that arose was that there was a report that was based on Guy Paul’s answers during his previous examination, a report which the crown wanted to introduce in affidavit form. This was disallowed by the Court as it was seen as new evidence.
The second and more grave of the issues which arose was the Judge’s address to the jury. In it the judge directed the jury to apply the standard of proof of “beyond a reasonable doubt” twice, once when looking at each individual piece of evidence, and again when looking at the whole case. The Crown argued that applying this standard twice would destroy any evidence they had for the evidence was to fit together and so should be seen as a finished product. It further argued that the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” applied only to the determination of guilt on the part of the defendant and not when deterring the authenticity of evidence.
The Impact of the Case on Society at the Time
Canadian society was generally horrified and infuriated when it was brought about that there had been a great deal of tampering with the evidence to make it look as though Guy Paul had committed the crime. It was impossible for individuals to come to grips with the fact that those police officers who had framed him wee still in active duty and had had no sanctions raised against them. Much of Canadian society was in an uproar and demanded accountability on the part of the police, forensic investigators, and the Crown. The case reaffirmed the general belief that serious overhauls needed to be made to police procedure, evidence collecting, and overall legal etiquette.
Guy Paul lost eleven years in prison for a crime he did not commit, for a crime he was framed for. It is unknown to this day why the police officers in the investigation wanted to frame Guy Paul with the murder of Christine Jessop. It is possible that they thought they would need to catch the perpetrator in order to prevent public anger at their inefficiency. Perhaps the case had seemed unsolvable and so they were resolved to have it closed. Or perhaps these actions have deeper roots and deeper pockets still; perhaps Guy Paul was to go to jail to allow the real killer to walk free.
It is a tragedy that such blatant disregard for the justice system was shown by those who would enforce it, yet, there have been no reproductions for any of the officers involved in the case and to this day nothing has been done to reprimand them.
Placement in the Annals of Legal History
The wrongful conviction of Guy Paul Morin has forever belonged in the annals of legal history as evidence that wrongful convictions are prevalent in any justice system. The conviction of Guy Paul Morin was based purely on contaminated evidence, circumstantial evidence, poor and unreliable testimony, and poor police work. After this case, the forensic science and police investigation community have been called upon to create stricter regulations. After Guy Paul Morin’s exoneration, a report made jointly by Canadian prosecutors and police officers made over forty recommendations including, “stricter guidelines on the use of often unreliable prison sources, better education for police and prosecutors on a range of issues, fostering a workplace culture that encourages questions, tightened investigative procedures and allowing defence lawyers to have forensic evidence tested independently”.
In many countries, including the United States, the debate over the death penalty has been resurged by the developments of Guy Paul Morin’s exoneration due to DNA tests, poor detective work, and improper forensic practices. As noted, the case of Guy Paul Morin showed the flaws of the justice system. Had this man been in a country which practiced capital punishment, he would have been facing the possibility of the death penalty. The flaw of justice that existed in the case of Guy Paul Morin has forever haunted those in the judicial system and has strengthened the argument of death penalty abolitionists throughout the world. The death penalty should be abolished out of fear that dozens of innocent lives are being put at risk. Overall, there was and still is a large concern over the notable fundamental flaws in judicial practices that have been brought to light through cases, such as the one involving Guy Paul Morin.
