In the Spring of 1972, while the Crown's appeal from Mr. Staples' acquittal was pending, Mr. Staples' defence counsel, Arthur Maloney, heard a rumour about the existence of a witness or witnesses named Salisbury. Mr. Maloney inquired of the Chief of Police as to whether or not the Hamilton Police had obtained any information from Wayne Salisbury and his wife during their investigation, and if so, whether it had been provided to the Crown Attorney. The Chief of Police in turn asked the investigating officers about this.
On October 30, 2000, while students with the Innocence Project were reviewing the Hamilton Police file, they saw a memo authored by one of the investigating officers on May 7, 1972, addressed to officers higher in the chain of command of the Hamilton Police.
The memo responded to the inquiry made by the Chief of Police, as to whether or not the information obtained from Wayne Salisbury and his wife had been disclosed to the Crown Attorney and Gary Staples defence counsel.
The memo is entitled "The Damned Salisburys". In it, the investigating officers attempt to explain why the highly material evidence provided by Wayne Salisbury and his wife had not been disclosed to the Crown Attorney or to Mr. Staples' defence counsel. The investigating officers admit in the memo that they had "concluded at the time that [the Salisburys'] testimony was immaterial and irrelevant and would so confuse a jury that they would acquit just because of the confusion."
The author of the memo further admitted that this conclusion was based on the inconsistency between the Salisburys' information and the information provided by James Johnston who was called as a witness by the Crown. The investigating officers wondered how the information about the Salisburys had come to the attention of defence counsel, and added that they were reluctant to record their response to the inquiry on paper at all.
That is, the investigating officers deliberately suppressed exculpatory evidence because they themselves had determined that it was sufficiently inconsistent with the police theory of the case that it would have lead to an acquittal. They were surprised that Mr. Staples' defence counsel had somehow come across the information they had sought to suppress.
In November, 1972, the Crown Attorney abandoned its appeal without offering any explanation. Neither Mr. Staples nor his defence counsel were told that the Hamilton Police had, in fact, obtained and suppressed highly material evidence from them. The police never confirmed the existence of the witnesses to the defence, or offered any explanation to the defence.
Other New Evidence
Further, on October 30, 2000, the law students from the Innocence Project and the Burke family members saw a number of documents containing exculpatory information of which the police were aware before and during the prosecution of Gary Staples in 1970, 1971 and 1972 which was not disclosed to Gary Staples' defence counsel at the time.
They also found handwritten notes and entries indicating that the investigating officers or other members of the Hamilton Police had assisted Mary Conklin in tailoring her evidence to take into account evidence which emerged during the preliminary inquiry and during the course of the trial, and during the police investigation, which was inconsistent with and contradictory of her various recountings of Gary Staples' supposed confession.
The students and family members were not allowed to make photocopies of the documents they inspected on October 30, 2000, but took lengthy and detailed notes of their findings.
Events after October 30, 2000 The law students could not finish their review of the Hamilton Police file on October 30, 2000 and at the end of the day agreed with the police officer responsible for arranging and supervising their access to the file, that they would return another day to finish reviewing the file.
In a subsequent exchange of correspondence between the Innocence Project and the Hamilton police, police Chief Kenneth Robertson confirmed that the law students from the Innocence Project could re-attend to complete their review of the file.
However, when the students attempted to make arrangements to re-attend to complete their review of the file, they were advised that the Hamilton Police had reconsidered the matter and had decided that it would NOT afford them access to the file, after all. All subsequent attempts to have them honour their previous commitment were futile, and no sufficient explanation has ever been provided. All attempts by the Burke family members to reach the police officer responsible for overseeing the matter have gone unanswered.
The police acknowledged that the file is inactive, but said that it was "officially" open (contrary to their position when an FOI request was made on behalf of Gary Staples, in response to which the Hamilton Police said the file was closed.)
Notwithstanding their position that the file was now officially re-opened, and hence not available for further inspection, the Hamilton Police expressly declined to re-open the investigation in fact, or to even assign a single investigator to work on the case.
NO investigative steps have been taken since the file was "re-opened". |
