Home

FOR PHOTOS from the June 5, 2001 news conference, see the News Conference page.

FOR NEWS COVERAGE from the Hamilton Spectator, see below.

FOR NEWS COVERAGE from the Toronto Star, the Toronto Sun, Metro, the National Post, the St. Catharines Standard, the Dunnville Chronicle, the Guelph Mercury, the Flamborough Review, and the Smithville newspaper, use the named links at the bottom of this page, or the navigation bar to the left for additional "News" pages.

Hamilton Spectator June 5, 2001

Hamilton police are facing a $6.1 million lawsuit which alleges investigators deliberately withheld key evidence in a murder case because it didn't fit their theory of who committed the killing.

Gary Staples was charged, convicted, then later acquitted of the 1969 murder of Gerald Burke, a Hamilton cab driver and father of two. Staples maintains the stigma of being labelled a murderer has never gone away.

The civil suit says that law students fighting for Staples' exoneration uncovered a key memo in the police files last October, which says investigators didnt' provide "highly material evidence" to the Crown or the defence team about two witnesses who saw three youths - possible witnesses or suspects - fleeing the murder scene. According to the statement of claim, the memo says police didn't pass this information on because they had "concluded at the time that the ... (witnesses') testimony was immaterial and irrelevant and would so confuse a jury that they would acquit just because of the confusion.

"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 led to an acquittal," the statement of claim reads.

The statement of claim, filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, makes allegations that have not been proved in court.

Hamilton police chief Ken Robertson, a defendant in the lawsuit, said it's important to "put the whole thing in context."

"It's a case that's 30 years old and it certainly shouldn't be a reflection on the current organization or its investigative techniques," he said.

Burke, 24, was shot in the head at close range on Dec. 5, 1969. He was found sitting in his cab behind an industrial plant on Dunbar Avenue, near Kenilworth Avenue North.<p>
Staples was arrested several months later and convicted largely on the false testimony of a jilted lover. The lawsuit says that woman was given a deal for leniency on robbery charges in exchange for information about Burke's murder.

Staples spent 22 months in prison. He won an appeal and was acquitted in a second trial after his mother found witnesses that corroborated her son's alibi - that he was getting his car fixed at the time at the time of December murder.

The lawsuit was filed by Staples, his wife and the two sons of the murdered man against the Hamilton Police Services, Robertson and four other officers. Burke's sons are suing for just $1 for negligence.

In addition to monetary damages, Staples is seeking a declaration from the police that he didn't commit the murder, and is asking that a new investigation be ordered.

The memo about the investigators withholding evidence surfaced after law students participating in an Osgoode Hall program known as the Innocence Project, which investigates wrongful convictions, started looking through poice files. The lawsuit says the students were initially denied access to the files, and were told by police the records had been destroyed.

The students were later allowed to see the files when they sought access to them on behalf of the Burke's sons.<p>
The lawsuit alleges the students also found "a number of documents containing exculpatory information of which the police were aware," including documents which suggested investigating officers helped a key witness tailor her evidence to fit the police version of events.

The suit says that when the students returned to look through the files a second time, "they were advised that the Hamilton Police had reconsidered the matter and had decided it would no longer afford them access to the file."

Robertson said yesterday that police denied them access after they threatened a lawsuit. "These people that came in to look at the files were given the files by us. We opened the books for them to read," he said. "We allowed them access to look at the information, and in return they sued us. So obviously we've now restricted their further access...based on a pending lawsuit."

Webmaster's note: The contents of the foregoing paragraph are untrue. Please see the letter to Hamilton Police Chief Ken Robertson immediately following this article.

Lawyer Paul Burstein, a co-director of the Innocence Project, said the memo "amounts to a virtual admission of, if not misconduct, clear tunnel vision" on behalf of police.

He said police do make mistakes at times but when they "deliberately ignore the signs on the road...and they go the wrong way, that's really scary. The memo is a clear road sign."

The suit also alleges that police neglected their duty by not re-opening the murder investigation in a meaningful way when it became apparent that Staples had been wrongly prosecuted and the killer or killers were still at large.

Robertson said he would be taking another look at the case.
"I don't take too much interest in cases that are 31 years old, to be candid with you. But I certainly will as a result of this lawsuit, be having a detailed look at it. If there's anything that needs to be done, it will done, I can assure the public."

Webmaster's note: The contents of the foregoing paragraph are also addressed in the letter that follows this article.

The lawsuit also alleges that police beat Staples and put him into solitary confinement for 67 days in order to get him to confess to Burke's murder. Staples has always maintained his innocence.

You can contact Cheryl Stepan by e-mail at cstepan@hamiltonspectator.com or by telephone at 905-526-3235.

Letter to Hamilton Police Chief Ken Robertson
June 7, 2001

SENT VIA FAX: (number removed)

Chief Kenneth Robertson
Hamilton Police Service
155 King William Street
Box 1060, LCD1
Hamilton, Ontario
L8N 4C1

Dear Chief Robertson:

I am writing to request clarification in respect of two statements you are reported to have recently made about the investigation of the murder of Gerald Burke, and the lawsuit recently launched by his sons and Gary Staples.

As you may know, I am Co-Director of the Innocence Project at Osgoode Hall Law School.

You are quoted in the June 5th Hamilton Spectator as saying that you are not interested in a 31 year old case (referring to the investigation of the late Mr. Burke's murder) and as saying that the Hamilton Police Service's decision to deny the Innocence Project continued access to the police file was based on our intimation that Mr. Staples would be instituting litigation against the Police Service.

I wish to remind you that at the time the Innocence Project was communicating with you about returning to examine the police files, we never suggested that Mr. Staples was contemplating launching a lawsuit against the Hamilton Police Service. Indeed, we had never made that suggestion because it was not true. In your letter to the Innocence Project, dated December 7, 2000, you indicated that the Innocence Project students were welcome to come back and continue their review of the police file. Why would you have invited us back if we had suggested that Mr. Staples was going to sue the police? The suggestion of a possible lawsuit could only have come from within your own ranks. That may well explain why, at the end of January, the Innocence Project were told that your initial invitation to return had suddenly and inexplicably reversed. When we sought clarification as to why your invitation to return for a review of the file had been withdrawn, we were told that it was because the 31 year old case in which you have recently disavowed any interest had suddenly become "open" again, (though still inactive).

In view of the inconsistency between your recent statements to the press and the record of the communications between the Hamilton Police Service and the Innocence over access to the file, would you please clarify your position? More importantly, regarding your professed lack of interest in the Burke murder investigation, I ask that you immediately apologize to his sons and all members of the late Mr. Burke's family for what I hope you will agree on reflection is a dismissive, insensitive and inappropriate comment. Mr. Burke's sons would like to think that the Hamilton Police Service is always interested in trying to solve unsolved murders, including their father's.<p>
I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours truly,



Paul Burstein
Co-Director

Hamilton Spectator June 6, 2001

Gary Staples, centre, talks about life in jail after the death of Gerald Burke in 1969. Staples is flanked by Burke's sons Darrin Burke, left, and Robert Denison.

Victim's sons back accused

Cheryl Stepan
The Hamilton Spectator

On Jan. 23, 1971, Gary Staples was being led away to spend the "rest of his natural life" in prison for pressing a gun to the head of a young cab driver and father, and firing twice. "I haven't killed anyone," he protested at the time. Thirty years later he is still trying to convince the world to listen to him.

The murdered cab driver's two sons, Darrin Burke and Robert Denison, were among the many who believed Staples was the one who pulled the trigger and left their father slumped in the front seat of his cab behind an industrial plant on Dunbar Avenue in December 1969.

Not any more.

A quest to get to know Gerald Burke, the father who was taken from them when they were just one and two years old, recently led to some stunning revelations about the investigation into his murder. They now believe Staples didn't kill their father and yesterday stood beside him in a show of public support.

"Gary Staples didn't murder my father, somebody else did and I'd like to know who. If it was your father, I'm sure you'd like to know," Denison said during a tearful news conference.

Burke's sons are joining Staples in his long-time plea to have Hamilton police reopen the murder investigation and find the killer.

Staples also wants an apology and a declaration from police that he did not kill Burke.

That would finally free him of the shame and whispers he's faced in the community for decades.

To that end, the Dunnville man has launched a $6.1-million lawsuit against the police. The statement of claim, which contains allegations that have not been proved in court, maintains that Hamilton police conducted a malicious prosecution. This is based in part on a note Burke's sons and law students uncovered in police files and suggests investigators deliberately suppressed evidence that could have exonerated Staples at the time.

Burke's sons are also part of that lawsuit, suing for $1 for negligence.

Staples was convicted of Burke's murder at his first trial, but the conviction was quashed on appeal and a new trial ordered because new evidence was discovered. A second jury found him not guilty in 1972, but by then he had already spent 22 months in prison, and life as he knew it was torn to shreds.

Staples' ordeal began when he was dragged from his bed at gunpoint on April 26, 1970.

Police were led to his door by his jilted lover who gave them information on Burke's murder in exchange for leniency on robbery charges she was facing. She said Staples had killed Burke for the $40 he was carrying.

Staples thought the arrest was just a sick joke until an officer waved an arrest warrant in his face, claiming he killed Burke. "At that point I said if this isn't a joke, it's some kind of mistake. For months I thought they made a mistake," Staples said in an interview following yesterday's news conference.

But it wasn't a mistake. He was tried, convicted and sent to prison for life. At Kingston Penitentiary, a jail guard asked him if he'd like to work in the kitchen.

When Staples told him he didn't know anything about cooking, the guard reminded him that he had the rest of his life to learn.

"I worked in an environment where I was afraid for my own life. I worked with 24 men who had committed murder," he said.

When he got out of prison following his eventual acquittal -- his mother found witnesses to help corroborate his alibi -- he returned home to Dunnville thinking he could pick up his life where he left off.

Instead he found his first wife and son had left him -- partly, he acknowledges, because she learned during his trial that he'd been unfaithful.

"She took my son from me. He grew up not really knowing me," he said, taking his mind back to the painful events of 30 years ago.

He went through several jobs over the years, but they'd always end, he said, when word would spread that he was a "killer."

Hardest of all were the whispers and stares from people who believed he was a murderer who'd gotten away with it.

"I knew people would be talking about me, but I thought in a couple of months it would blow over. In a couple of months, it didn't blow over -- it never did," he said. "I would never wish upon anybody the last 30 years of my life."

But he never left Dunnville. He said he didn't deserve to be driven out, because, "I hadn't done anything wrong."

At the same time, Burke's sons were being raised by a stepfather they loved, but deprived of their natural father who was murdered before they got a chance to know him.

They said that after he was killed, their mother bundled them up, left the house and ran from her old life.

"After my father died, we kind of became estranged from the rest of the family," Darrin Burke said.

A few years ago, they set out to learn more about their father. They met some law students from the Innocence Project at Osgoode Hall law school who were investigating Burke's murder on behalf of Staples.

At the sons' request, Hamilton police granted access to the murder files. The law students and Burke's sons spent an emotional day going through the piles of documents last October.

For the first time, Robert Denison got to see a photograph of his father -- unfortunately, it was from a crime scene.

"The first pictures I saw of him were autopsy pictures," he said.

In addition to learning a bit about who their father was, they also came upon some revealing information about the investigation.

"We were going in looking for answers, but instead we came out with more questions," Darrin Burke said. "There was very, very little in there to say Gary had anything to do with this. To this day, I don't understand how Gary was arrested in the first place."

Among the documents was a interdepartmental memo which allegedly says investigators withheld evidence about two witnesses who saw three youths -- possible witnesses or suspects -- fleeing the murder scene. The memo allegedly states that police didn't pass on this information because it would confuse a jury and lead to Staples' acquittal.

They grew up believing Staples was the killer, but now they felt differently.

"Up until that point, we were told the guy who did it lived in Dunnville and he got off," Darrin Burke said.

In March, they met Staples for the first time. Then they decided to help.

"What better way to have people believe you didn't do it than having the victim's sons sitting beside you?" Darrin Burke said.

Gary Staples' second wife Marie wipes her eyes at press conference.

Hamilton Spectator June 7, 2001

JUSTICE: Reclaiming a Reputation
Staples case demands swift investigation

Police always move with lightning speed when they find new evidence to nail down a murder conviction. Justice, however, is a two-way street. All too often, police move at a snail's pace to clear a person's reputation when compelling evidence emerges to prove that someone has been prosecuted unfairly, wrongfully convicted and imprisoned.

In the case of Gary Staples, it can mean having to spend a lifetime under a cloud of suspicion.

After more than 30 years, Staples is still waiting for Hamilton police to clear his name and end the notoriety he has endured since his 1971 conviction for the murder of taxi driver Gerald Burke. The need to set the record straight has taken on new urgency and the police have an obligation to respond in kind. Credible, disturbing new allegations cast serious doubt on the fairness of the police investigation that led to Staples wrongful conviction for the murder and 22 months in prison, before he was acquitted at a second trial in 1972.

Despite the acquittal, Staples was never exonerated by the police. The stigma of the original conviction has tarnished his reputation among people in Dunnville who have been suspicious about him ever since. Although a free man, he was left without compensation for the time he spent in prison and never received an apology. He did not have enough resources to prove his innocence until he was offered assistance by students in an Osgoode Hall program known as Project Innocence.

The student sleuths unearthed evidence that they consider to be the smoking gun to prove police had the wrong suspect - a memo suggesting that investigators withheld key evidence because it did not fit their theory of who committed the crime. Police, according to the memo, didn't pass along information about two witnesses who saw three youths - possible witnesses or suspects - flee the murder scene.

The disclosure has made a deep impression on the sons of the slain cab driver, who grew up believing Staples was the killer. They are now convinced that Staples is innocent and have joined him in a $6.1-million lawsuit against the police. The revelations also prompted Justice Walter Stayshyn, who was one of Staples lawyers, to express concern about learning long after the fact that material information was suppressed.

While the courts deal with the lawsuit, the onus is on the police to move swiftly to determine whether the investigation should be reopened. It won't wash for police to react defensively, and to suggest the file isn't a priority because it is 31 years old and the laws on disclosure have since been improved. Given the ordeal that Staples has been through, and the gravity of the allegations, police should be anxious to establish the truth and to treat Staples request for exoneration with the respect it deserves.

That's the best way to uphold confidence in the fairness and integrity of the police service.

- Gord McNulty

Additional news coverage at the following links:

Toronto Star

Toronto Sun

St. Catharines Standard

National Post

Guelph Mercury

Metro

Flamborough Review

Dunnville Chronicle

Smithville Newspaper