Reverting to my original position

Well, I'm female. I'm allowed to change my mind. Seriously, I've spoken to a number of other people who are concerned with justice in Canada over the last few days, and they have succeeded in convincing me that David would be traumatized if he had to testify; he wouldn't have anything to add, and if this were a trial and he were a defendant, he would not have to take the stand.

What I was thinking earlier was that if this were a trial, David would be the victim. He would have requested the legal proceeding and he would have had to testify. That was the error in my logic because this isn't a trial; it's a commission that is looking into the reasons why David was originally convicted.

David has been perfectly clear about the fact that he feels emotionally unable to withstand cross-examination. Earlier I said that I thought he should testify because he and the family requested the inquiry. That's true -- they did demand an investigation into what went wrong in the criminal justice system, but it doesn't necessarily follow that he should have to be there if he feels mentally and psychologically unequipped to cope with it. Moreover, there is a possibility that he would be cross-examined unkindly, which would be unthinkable considering what he's gone through.

I was lying in bed last night worrying about the whole thing and I thought, what would I dread doing more than anything else in life? My answer was going through a glucose tolerance test because I had one once before and my blood sugar fell so low --28 mg -- that I nearly passed out or had a seizure. Then I spent a week in bed afterwards with violent migraines. No matter what's at stake, I will never go through another procedure like that.

If testifying at the inquiry is Milgaard's glucose tolerance test, he needs to pass. Surely, a doctor's letter will suffice or he can be permitted to testify by satellite.

My first reaction was that he should NOT have to testify. Sometimes a knee-jerk response like that is the most authentic reply and what I've been doing since is intellectualizing. I hope that MacCallum will accommodate the Milgaards and their lawyers -- after all, it is their inquiry!

Sigrid Mac

The Official Mandate as Stated by The Inquiry

On February 20, 2004, the Government of Saskatchewan announced the appointment of the Honourable Mr. Justice Edward P. MacCallum of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench to conduct an inquiry into the wrongful conviction of David Milgaard.

The Commission has a mandate to inquire into and report on any and all aspects of the conduct of the investigation into the death of Gail Miller, and the subsequent criminal proceedings resulting in the wrongful conviction of David Milgaard on the charge that he murdered Gail Miller.

The Commission also has the responsibility to seek to determine whether the investigation should have been re-opened based on information subsequently received by the police and the Department of Justice.

The Commission will report its findings and make such recommendations as it considers advisable relating to the administration of criminal justice in the province of Saskatchewan.

As provided in the Public Inquiries Act, the Commission shall perform its duties without expressing any conclusion or recommendation regarding the civil or criminal liability of any person or organization, and without interfering in any ongoing criminal or civil proceeding.

The Commission will deliver its final report containing its findings, conclusions and recommendations to the Attorney General of Saskatchewan, who will make the report public.

Joyce Milgaard receives permission to stand in for her son.

Justice MacCallum ruled that he will fund Joyce Milgaard's traveling expenses and the cost of one lawyer, James Lockyer, if Joyce stands in on David's behalf, The Star Phoenix reported. Joyce had requested a second lawyer, Joanne McLean, who could fill in for James if he were absent, but McCallum did not think that this was necessary and did not approve it.

You can read more about this ruling at Injustice Busters:
http://www.injusticebusters.com/04/Milgaard_inquiry.htm

Sigrid Mac

Joyce Milgaard Castigates MacCallum

Joyce Milgaard spoke out strongly against Justice MacCallum's decision to force her son to testify at the inquiry. She seemed incredulous that Larry Fisher, a known serial rapist and murderer, could maintain legal standing at the hearing but that her own wrongly convicted son could lose his. CBC News quoted Joyce as saying that David could be "devastated" if he were forced to undergo cross-examination.

I would like to make it clear that Joyce Milgaard is a dear friend of mine. I have been a supporter of David Milgaard's since 1992 and I know how badly treated he was. I met him personally on a number of occasions. We were "friends" for a year or two when he used to visit his mother in Ottawa. At that time, he had just been released from prison and -- how can I put this delicately? -- he was a total basket case. He was severely traumatized by having been gang raped in prison a number of times when he was quite young. Dave endured months in solitary confinement, which was grossly inhumane for a person with such fragile mental-health. He tried to kill himself two or three times. He went through hell. There's no disputing that and no one would want to hurt him any further by making him do something that makes him feel so uncomfortable. Just seems as tho this issue should have been addressed months ago by the Justice and the lawyers.

A Canadian Press article by Tim Cook, said that Hersh Wolch did make it perfectly clear back in January that David did not want to testify. MacCallum knew that but he got really mad after David called the press conference, using the rooms of the inquiry to "undermine it," which is how MacCallum perceived David's comments.

"The Milgaard inquiry is unique in that Milgaard is physically able to testify but doesn't want to," said Lorne Sossin, associate dean of law at the University of Toronto and an expert on public inquiries.

Sossin wondered how the public would perceived the outcome of the inquiry if the main man does not have the "confidence" in the process to attend. It's not about confidence -- it's about David not wanting to relive this whole nightmare. And it's not really about his physical ability either; it's about his mental-health.

David has never participated in any of the legal events surrounding his case, if he could help it, since he completed the suit against Saskatchewan. Immediately before that was resolved, David was hospitalized for clinical depression, which resolved once the litigation was over and the financial compensation package was settled. Lest anyone think that Milgaard was after money, he could barely spend the money after he got it because he had become so accustomed to being a welfare hippie. He ended up giving a large portion of his settlement away to various members of his family, and appears to be using the rest to travel and support himself since he will not likely ever work again.

Sigrid Mac

More Police Errors in the Ardeth Wood Case

A 76-year-old former RCMP Officer saw Ardeth Wood on the day that she disappeared. She was on the bike path and he had been cycling. He said to her that it seemed awfully hot out and she agreed. Then she continued on with her biking and the former officer, Al Dzikowski, noticed a younger man on a bike who followed Ardeth. He thought nothing of it at the time but after he read about Ardeth's disappearance, he called the police right away and left a message on their answering machine.

What did they do? They ignored him. This did not deter Dzikowski, who contacted the Wood family directly. In turn, they called the police but police still did not meet with the former RCMP man or request that he look at a lineup of suspects or mug shots. In fact, it took the police more than two years to contact Dzikowski, who now believes that Chris Myers was the man on the trail. When the police finally did call Dzikowski in September of this year, they conscientiously took down his name, address and phone number. Only problem is that they took down the phone number incorrectly, so they never called him back! Sounds like a Monty Python skit except that it's not funny.

As if it wasn't bad enough to extradite Myers from Arnprior to North Bay without realizing that he bore a resemblance to the composite sketch, Ottawa Police have managed to compound their error by incompetently handling a tip from a man who actually spoke to Ardeth Wood on the NCC path!

What I have said previously about eyewitness testimony being unreliable notwithstanding, things are looking bad for Chris Myers. The original description of the suspect in the Wood case was a man in his mid-to late twenties but Dzikowski always maintained that the person he saw looked much younger -- somewhere between 18 to 23. That would fit in with Myers' profile since Ardeth Wood was murdered in 2003 and Chris Myers is 25 right now.

Police Chief Bevan has a lot of explaining to do.

Sigrid Mac

Judge Orders Milgaard to Testify

No surprise to those of us who've followed events over the last couple of days -- Justice MacCallum has ordered David Milgaard to testify at the inquiry. If he does not comply, he will not only lose legal standing but also funding for his defense counsel, Hersh Wolch.

Wolch did his best to argue on David's behalf, insisting that he is in therapy and his doctor has advised him against testifying and having to relive events from the past. MacCallum was unmoved. He was particularly annoyed that David called a press conference on Monday, using the physical grounds of the inquiry.

In his first visit back to Saskatoon since his arrest, Dave advocated for compensation for Michel Dumont of Quebec and Ronald Dalton of New Foundland; according to the Katherine Harding of the Globe and Mail, Joanne Marceau, a spokeswoman for the Quebec Justice Department, said "Mr. Dumont isn't eligible for compensation because he hasn't 'established his factual innocence.' Newfoundland Justice Minister Tom Marshall said Mr. Dalton's case was still being reviewed."

"With astonishing hubris, Mr. Milgaard arranged to use this very hearing room, paid for at public expense, to publicly undermine the work of the inquiry, an inquiry he himself demanded, and to threaten the commission with the stigma of popular disapproval should it have the temerity to subpoena him as a witness. To borrow a diplomatic expression, such conduct by a party with standing is unacceptable,"
MacCallum stated.

Dave has until November 18 to make up his mind as to whether or not he wants the inquiry to proceed, which would involve him showing up, or if he wants it to fold. A very messy and unfortunate set of circumstances.

Is MacCallum being unreasonable? Should David have to testify? I've already given my opinion; unless testifying could precipitate some sort of mental collapse, I believe that David should attend the very hearing that he and his family demanded. What are your thoughts?

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/10/26/milgaard-warning051026.html

http://www.canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/news/story.html?id=57dcd83c-4eac-4fb7-9f5d-30c32b88181c

Sigrid Mac

Chris Myers suspected in Sudbury murder

25-year-old Chris Myers of Ottawa, who was arrested the other day and charged with the murder of Ardeth Wood, is now a suspect in the death of Laurentian University student, Renee Sweeney. 23-year-old Sweeney was a history major who was stabbed to death one night on January 27, 1998 when she was working alone in a video store. The store was robbed of less than $200, the Ottawa Citizen reported, and evidence was discovered at the scene of the crime including footprints in the snow, a pair of gardening gloves, a bloodstained jacket and DNA.

But Sweeney's father is dubious about this possibility. He reminded Sudbury police that Chris Myers would only have been 16 years old at the time and he lived in Ottawa not Sudbury.

Once again, Myers is being suspected of involvement in this case based on the composite sketch. I find that to be somewhat unnerving. To begin with, when I looked at the composite sketch in the newspaper and compared it to the picture of Chris Myers, I didn't see a resemblance. Secondly, when Ardeth Wood was killed back in 2003, I clearly remember the police were looking for a suspect who was tall with sandy colored hair and had an eagle tattoo. Chris Myers has dark hair and no tattoo. He also does not appear to wear glasses whereas the composite sketch from Sudbury had a guy wearing glasses; and that man looked considerably older than 16 or 17 years of age!

I'm not saying that Myers had nothing to do with the tragic death of Renee Sweeney. I know nothing about that case except what I read today. What I am saying is that it's dangerous for people to base their reactions around a composite sketch, which may now be having a snowballing effect (e.g. Sudbury police read that North Bay police think that Myers matches the picture of the Ottawa sketch, therefore, Sudbury suspects him in their own unsolved murder).

Recently, I read that about 40% of all of the Death Row cases that have been overturned were convictions that were originally based on eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable! The only thing that might be more unreliable than eyewitness testimony is a composite sketch!@! We have to be damn careful about jumping conclusions here.

This is in no way meant to be any kind of defense of Chris Myers, who appears to be a serial rapist and may indeed be involved with the murder of Ardeth Wood. But before I reach that conclusion, I would like to see some evidence.

Sigrid Mac

Milgaard may be forced to testify

According to CBC News, Justice Edward MacCallum was not a happy camper when he discovered that Milgaard doesn't want to testify at the inquiry. David's lawyer, Hersh Wolch, said that David would have little to offer the hearing because he wasn't present for any of the important interviews with his friends, and he knows nothing about Larry Fisher.

That's true. And it would be horrible if MacCallum forced David to testify, which looks as though it may happen. OTOH, I am starting to reconsider my position from yesterday.

David should not have to suffer any more than he already has. However, it is his hearing. He and his family pushed for this inquiry so that they could find out what the hell went so terribly wrong that a young man of 16 ended up spending 23 of the best years of his life behind bars. Maybe he should be there. He testified at the Supreme Court. Hersh is saying that David's testimony would not be relevant but how do we know that?

Years ago, I was hit by a drunk driver and very badly injured. I was terrified to face this man in court. He had broken all of my bones. I couldn't walk for a year. I endured 15 separate hospitalizations and four major surgeries. I had internal injuries and to this day I have never been able to work full-time due to chronic health problems caused by the accident. I had NO desire to see this man. I was panic stricken at the thought and I would have sold my soul to the lowest bidder to have gotten out of it. But it was my lawsuit. I had to be there!, So, I went -- sick, nervous and resentful.

This is the Milgaard Inquiry. I'm sorry if Dave feels revictimized. God knows, nobody would want to do that to the poor man. But he and his family requested the investigation. UNLESS IT WOULD CAUSE HIM EXTREME MENTAL DURESS, perhaps he should be present to offer whatever information he has, both for himself and for others who have been wrongly convicted. It's terribly sad and unfortunate that he may have to be subpoenaed.

Sigrid Mac

Don't Make David Milgaard Testify!

It's kind of like raping the rape victim, which is often what happens when police interrogate a survivor of sexual assault. They revictimized him or her.

That's the way Dave would feel if he is forced to testify at the inquiry. He issued a public statement today in Saskatoon, urging the government to quickly resolve the cases of Michel Dumont in Quebec and Ronald Dalton in Newfoundland, which make Dave "ashamed to be a Canadian."

Of course, it would be helpful to have David's firsthand testimony. But if it's going to traumatize him and make him "feel sick," why can't the inquiry proceed without him? It's only decent and humane. Leave him alone. He's created a new life and spends much of his time traveling abroad. Let him have some peace of mind without having to relive those frightful 23 years again.

Sigrid Mac

Milgaard returns to Saskatoon

David Milgaard will be visiting Saskatoon on Monday morning for the first time since his fateful trip there in 1969. He has called a press conference and wants to make a statement about the Canadian justice system.

Based on what Joyce has told me in the past, I know that Dave doesn't want to have any involvement in the Inquiry. Of course, he cares about the end result but he doesn't particularly want to testify, to be there or to follow events week by week.

We'll see what he has to say when the The inquiry reconvenes on Monday.

25-year-old man arrested in Ardeth Wood case

This morning, my mother said to me, "They've got Ardeth Wood's killer!"

"Really?" I asked. I was excited. After 26 months, I thought that the police had finally discovered the brute that sexually assaulted and murdered 27-year-old university student, Ardeth Wood. But when I queried my mother in more detail, I realized that the police had arrested a suspect. As those of us who work in the field of wrongful convictions know, that is not the same as "finding the killer."

Chris Myers of Ottawa was arrested yesterday and appeared in court today after a North Bay detective was led to believe that Myers was involved in Wood's death. Police will not reveal the evidence against Myers except to say that he has also been charged with four other sexual assaults in Ottawa -- three of which occurred after Ardeth's death -- and another assault in Gatineau.

North Bay Detective Constable Noel Coulas recognized Myers from a composite sketch that was devised and circulated throughout the country in the aftermath of the Wood murder. Coulas encountered Myers when he investigated him in May as a suspect in a sexual assault in North Bay. Ironically, Myers was sent to North Bay by the Ottawa police, who picked him up in Arnprior, and thought that he might have been involved in the attack in North Bay.

Why didn't it occur to the Ottawa police that Myers may have been involved in Ardeth Wood's death? If Coulas noticed a resemblance between Myers and the composite sketch, why didn't the Ottawa police see that same similarity? Surely, they must have the composite sketch plastered on the walls of their offices. In addition, Myers was one of the 1700 people who were interviewed in the Wood case, and he has been charged with five or six sexual assaults in at least three locations, including Ottawa, Gatineau and North Bay.

Coulas was very modest about his role in identifying Myers in the sketch. Ottawa Police Chief Vince Bevan said that often "hard work and luck" paid off. Bevan has never recovered his reputation after bungling the Paul Bernardo case. (It took the police almost two years to analyze Bernardo's DNA; meanwhile, he was out murdering schoolgirls.)

Bevan and the Ottawa people could have been a lot more proactive here. Essentially, they found a man who was on their list of suspects -- sorry, "persons of interest" -- in the Ardeth Wood case AND they handed him over to North Bay! Moreover, this took place in May and we are now almost at the end of October. What transpired during those five months? Why did it take so long to pick Myers up? A lot of questions remain unanswered.

Chris Myers maintains his innocence. You can read more about this breaking news at http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=a296cc8c-7407-4947-ae7d-f9e7689b7bc8.

Apparently, Ardeth Wood's brutal murder and the search for her killer has been one of Ottawa's most costly investigations; so far, it has cost approximately $675,000, and that is just the financial toll, which doesn't include the horrific pain and suffering of the Wood family.

Since I've been working in the field of wrongful convictions for approximately 13 years, I urge you to reserve judgment on this arrest until we hear the actual evidence. I would like to jump for joy by concluding that perhaps we have the real killer after all this time, when it had been looking so hopeless. But without a confession or a statement from the police as to the nature of the exact evidence against Myers, I will try to maintain a neutral position. All I can conclude at the moment is that it definitely sounds as though this man is a serial rapist. He rides a bike, he was seen on 24 separate occasions on the bike path that Ardeth Wood traveled on, and he left the Ottawa area several weeks after her murder. He could be our man but we'll have to wait and see.

Sigrid Mac

Milgaard's former prosecutor admits failure to disclose info

On Wednesday, October 5, Milgaard's former prosecutor, Bobs Caldwell, admitted that he did not provide full disclosure to Milgaard's lawyer, Calvin Tallis. According to Betty Ann Adam of the Star Phoenix, Caldwell was aware of four episodes of sexual assault that occurred in Saskatoon; one happened within minutes of Gail Miller's murder and another groping episode was directed at a nurse. (Gail Miller was a nursing student.)

Caldwell's explanation for his failure to come forth with this information was that he did not think that it was pertinent. Moreover, he admitted that he may have been influenced by police notes on the report, which stated that the "indecent assaults" were "not related" to Miller's murder. This reinforces Mel Green's theory that Crown attorneys place far too much faith in the police.

Sigrid Mac

Melvyn Green -- Suggestions for Reform

Milgaard's original prosecutor, "Bobs" Caldwell, testified at the hearing this week. He said that he had some concerns about the original case but proceeded anyway because the police had presented such a strong case against David.

This failure to questions the police fits in well with some ideas that were presented recently by AIDWYC's co-president, Mel Green, in an article entitled "Crown Culture and Wrongful Convictions: A Beginning." Green began by saying that wrongful conviction shared certain traits such as the police having tunnel vision, the use of jailhouse informants, a lack of full disclosure, false confessions, mistaken identifications, and what he called "junk science."

He went on to discuss "Crown culture", which he defined as a collective way of thinking, with shared values and attitudes. Canadian miscarriages of justice appear to be less likely the result of "deliberate malice" than our American or British counterparts; instead they were caused by systemic failures, according to Green. "Every Canadian historical wrongful conviction is attributable, at least in part, to the Crown's failure to provide full disclosure to the defence." This didn't occur because the Crown was corrupt or negligent. It happened because the justice system is currently set up in an adversarial manner and prosecutors want to win. Consequently, in the cases of Milgaard, Morin, Marshall and Sophonow in Manitoba, the prosecution took advantage of their position and did not make full disclosure to the defence.

Green discussed personality characteristics of prosecutors, saying that they're often "macho", "crime fighters", or see themselves as do-gooders. (Hello, Nancy Grace!) Prosecutors automatically trust the police and have a lot of sympathy for crime victims. They regularly see crime victims and their families whereas they don't see the defendant and his family. This makes it easy for prosecutors to develop tunnel vision, so that they don't question facts that appear to be incongruous with their own theories. They are also reluctant to reassess a situation after a conviction. Case closed! Look at the prosecutor on Larry King Live who refused to concede that Kirk Bloodsworth was innocent in the face of concrete scientific proof. As we well know, prosecutors are loath to admit their own mistakes or take any responsibility for actions that may have resulted in miscarriages of justice.

In order to remedy the current situation, Mel Green proposed several ideas for reform. Firstly, prosecutors need to admit that they are fallible human beings who can make mistakes. They need to be held accountable for their behaviour. Secondly, the judicial system must let go of the notion that it is critical to win a case at all costs; winning should not be the sole goal of the prosecutor. Presenting the facts in a fair yet persuasive manner, with the notion of JUSTICE in mind, is the ideal goal.

Green recommends discipline for prosecutors who make serious errors and rewards for those who are brave enough to report police misconduct. He suggests that Provincial Crown Law offices start special units to investigate cases of "factual innocence." (And this team should not include the original prosecutor.) Lastly, Green offered an innovative idea for change: the province should consider "outsourcing a portion of our caseloads to private lawyers to make the whole process less adversarial and partisan."

If any of these suggestions for reform had been in place during Milgaard's original trial, Bobs Caldwell might have listened to his own intuition, which led him to question certain issues around Gail Miller's clothing, rather than blindly putting his faith in the police investigation.

Sigrid Mac

When Love Is Not Enough

This post is a book review that I just wrote re: Missing Sarah, which is about one of the women in Vancouver who went missing and is believed to have been murdered by Robert Pickton. I am writing this here, not because I suspect any kind of wrongful conviction, but rather because of the sloppy and disinterested investigation by the Vancouver Police Department. Who cares about missing "hookers" and drug addicts? Likewise, David Milgaard was treated with derision since he was a long-haired hippie in the sixties (and a druggie, to boot.) There are systemic problems in our criminal justice system that start with the attitudes of the police. Nowhere is that better exemplified than in the book Missing Sarah.

As always, if you disagree with my views on drugs or prostitution, please feel free to comment. I welcome dissenting opinions. Sigridmac
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Missing Sarah, Maggie de Vries writes a provocative and heartbreaking story about her sister, Sarah, who was one of 69 women who went missing from the Eastside of Vancouver in the 1990s. Shockingly, Sarah's DNA was discovered on Robert Pickton's farm, yet that evidence was not sufficient for the police to charge him with her murder.

A professional writer, Maggie goes back in time to give us a detailed portrait of Sarah’s earlier years. A child of mixed racial descent, Sarah was adopted into a Caucasian family; she was taunted at school and mocked for her ethnicity. Although the family adored Sarah and vice versa, this devotion was not enough to surpass the pain from the racist insults that Sarah received. She became a troubled teenager, feeling that she did not belong anywhere. Sarah began to run away, and eventually felt more comfortable in group homes and in her own low-rent apartment than she did with her family.

Maggie traces Sarah's journey into drugs and prostitution. She also analyzes different factors that have decreased the safety of sex trade work. According to Maggie, between 1960 and 1974, only one prostitute was the victim of a violent death in British Columbia. From 1975 to 1980, the number increased to a total of three women. It started rising in the 90s, resulting in 24 dead sex trade workers in B.C. before the maniacal actions of Robert Pickton.

This is an important book. Not only do we get to know Sarah de Vries as a person, rather than a faceless, drug addicted prostitute, but we also get a sense of how terribly wrong it is for our hypocritical society to push sex trade workers into the deepest and darkest corners of the city where they will inevitably be easy prey for perverts and malevolent men. Policymakers as well as the general public should take heed. Sex trade workers, who are often only teenagers, need our protection.

Missing Sarah makes a strong argument for the decriminalization of drugs since many prostitutes cannot leave the job because they need to work to feed their habit. It also advocates the legalization of the sex trade. I support both of these positions. All acts between consenting adults should be legal, especially when doing so gives sex trade workers a safe physical location. That way they don't have to solicit on corners and get into cars with strangers who may beat, rob, rape or kill them.

Robert Pickton is currently behind bars but there's a dangerous serial murderer stalking prostitutes in Edmonton. What are city officials there doing about it?

Larry Fisher's ex-wife testifies

Linda Fisher, Larry Fisher's ex-wife, testified at the Inquiry hearing this week. According to Betty Ann Adam, Linda suspected her husband of murdering Gail Miller within hours of the attack because her kitchen knife was missing, her husband had not returned home the previous evening, there was blood on his clothing and he did not go to work that day. Also, apparently Larry acted very strange when Linda offhandedly accused him of involvement in the Miller murder. But Linda was only kidding when she accused her husband; her suspicions were vague and she didn't really believe that he had been involved. Consequently, Linda did not take this information to the police until 1980 because she assumed that the justice system could not have made an error in the Milgaard case.

At that time, her ex-husband was arrested for rape and attempted murder in North Battleford while he was out of prison on parole. Linda was aware that Milgaard was appealing his conviction, thus, she made the courageous move to visit the Saskatoon police station and tell them about her concerns. The police never followed up.

Shockingly, Linda Fisher also told the hearing that her ex-husband had confided in her before his release from prison in 1980, stating that he had not received any treatment in prison and feared that he might reoffend if he got out. Linda Fisher relayed this information to the corrections department, which apparently did not take it seriously.

Finally, in 1990, Joyce Milgaard went looking for Linda Fisher after her lawyer received a tip from an unknown source, saying that serial rapist Fisher was living in the basement of Shorty Cadrain's house -- the house that David had visited on the day of Gail Miller's murder

Really, how many endless mistakes could there have been in the Milgaard case? Linda Fisher went to the Saskatoon police. She spoke to the corrections department. Isn't there a limit to incompetence? The more obvious answer seems to indicate that the police were doing everything imaginable to cover their own backsides with little regard for any of the victims in this scenario. And lest we forget, the first and foremost victims here were Gail Miller and her family. There was no justice for the Miller family until Larry Fisher was put behind bars. That's what makes his current protestations of innocence so very repulsive and pathetic.

Sigrid Mac