Steven Truscott: is he truly innocent?

[Clockworkhigh]

I do not believe Steven Truscott's case has ever been on UM. But in many ways it is unsolved.

For those of you that live in Canada and especially Ontario you have likely heard the story of him. In 1959 a 12 year old girl named Lynne Harper was found dead. Truscott was 14 at the time and was basically convicted of the murder because he was the last person who had been seen with her riding on his bike. He has always maintained to this day that Lynne got off his bike and he saw her get into a 1959 Ford (I believe that was the make). He was sentenced to hang back when Canada actually had a spine and had the death penalty.

He didn't get executed. Instead he served 10 years in prison and was released in 1969. It makes me think the judge realized how circumstantial the prosecution's evidence was and this is why he got the sentence he got.

Truscott met a woman while in prison, married her and I believe now has two grown sons. Truscott will be 65 in 2010. To this day he has never changed his story. In fact, when his name surfaced a few years ago despite living a normal life he went all the way to the top of the Canadian government to be fully exonerated for his prison time. This was 35 years after he was released from prison and he went to GREAT lengths to clear his name, not just being content on being free.

In Canada for those that know this case most if not all will agree that this was a case where the justice system failed and a truly innocent boy was jailed. With the exception of Lynne's remaining family who recently spoke out against him being exhonerated, there isn't a single person who I have ever heard complain about his innocence.

Does anyone have an opinion on this case if you are familiar with it?

[TripperFan]

I believe he's innocent. The last doc the CBC did after he was released pretty much convinced me. I feel for the guy really.

[Kane]

It doesn't sound familiar, so it was probably never featured on UM.

[TripperFan]

Originally Posted by Kane

It doesn't sound familiar, so it was probably never featured on UM.

Too bad really - it was a fascinating story. A lot of people always thought he was railroaded for that one - and so young too.

[Tighthead]

Originally Posted by Pus$y Galore

Too bad really - it was a fascinating story. A lot of people always thought he was railroaded for that one - and so young too.

I don't think the evidence was there to convict him, but I would tend to think he is guilty.

I can't recall the details right now, but it seemed like the victim and place of death were highly coincidental with Truscott's plans for the evening.

I do think his case was kind of a railroad job though.

[TripperFan]

Originally Posted by Tighthead

I don't think the evidence was there to convict him, but I would tend to think he is guilty.

I can't recall the details right now, but it seemed like the victim and place of death were highly coincidental with Truscott's plans for the evening.

I do think his case was kind of a railroad job though.

That's where this CBC special was really good though - it clearly showed a good possibility of it being someone else at the same time. I think the guy is now dead tho and that's where it makes it really tough to prove. Even with DNA testing now. I think that's still the missing ideal evidence left to go. I know they gave him a load of money and did clear his name, but hell, all those years in jail and with that stigma attached to him. He never did get a good work record because of it.

All I can say is thankfully we now have DNA testing - otherwise Paul Bernardo could well be a free man still.

[Tighthead]

Originally Posted by Pus$y Galore

That's where this CBC special was really good though - it clearly showed a good possibility of it being someone else at the same time. I think the guy is now dead tho and that's where it makes it really tough to prove. Even with DNA testing now. I think that's still the missing ideal evidence left to go. I know they gave him a load of money and did clear his name, but hell, all those years in jail and with that stigma attached to him. He never did get a good work record because of it.

All I can say is thankfully we now have DNA testing - otherwise Paul Bernardo could well be a free man still.

I saw the Fifth Estate bit. It was well done, but highly speculative imo.

The Baltovich case is interesting.

[TripperFan]

Originally Posted by Tighthead

I saw the Fifth Estate bit. It was well done, but highly speculative imo.

The Baltovich case is interesting.

Baltovich? Not sure if I know 'bout that one. Do tell...

[soilentgreen]

Originally Posted by Tighthead

I don't think the evidence was there to convict him, but I would tend to think he is guilty.

I can't recall the details right now, but it seemed like the victim and place of death were highly coincidental with Truscott's plans for the evening.

I do think his case was kind of a railroad job though.

I read about this case in a crime book years ago and came to the same conclusions. Despite the public support for Truscott's innocence, at this point I don't think it can be conclusively established (any DNA evidence having been destroyed or degraded years ago) and I believe he is guilty of the crime. For those who feel he is innocent, Wiliam Heirens' case in Illinois is an interesting comparison.

From what I recall, Truscott's friends placed him at and around Lawson's Bush (where Harper's body was found) on the night of the murder, there were recent abrasions on his arms, elbows and knees and lesions on his genitals that were never explained. Add to this Truscott's claim that Harper was picked up by a passing motorist, the debate over his statements and the actual time of her death and it would have made a interesting Final Appeal segment.

[soilentgreen]

Damn double post.....

[Clockworkhigh]

Hmmm, interesting analysis. To be honest I have almost never heard anyone claim Steven is guilty. It is almost unanimous for people to believe he is innocent. There was a minister in the prison who took Steven in after his prison sentence was up. He lived with him and his family and it never crossed the minister's mind that he had murdered anyone. I know it is only one man's opinion, but still.

Plus the thing about Steven is that while I might get this wrong, I believe it was him who came out of seclusion in 2000 and tried to clear his name. He wasn't intent on letting sleeping dogs lie. This I found perplexing. Do you see Larry Gibson going out of his way to clear his name and get completely exhonerated? No, because his story is so freakin unbelievable that he knows better to just quietly hope for Tommy's body to show up and not draw attention to himself.

There is just something about a free man with SO much to lose going out on a limb to clear his name when he really could carry on himself and no one would bother him

[soilentgreen]

Originally Posted by Clockworkhigh

Plus the thing about Steven is that while I might get this wrong, I believe it was him who came out of seclusion in 2000 and tried to clear his name. He wasn't intent on letting sleeping dogs lie. This I found perplexing. Do you see Larry Gibson going out of his way to clear his name and get completely exhonerated? No, because his story is so freakin unbelievable that he knows better to just quietly hope for Tommy's body to show up and not draw attention to himself.

There is just something about a free man with SO much to lose going out on a limb to clear his name when he really could carry on himself and no one would bother him

I'm not even about to try to sway your opinion, but will mention that individuals such as Sam Sheppard and James Hanratty also repeatedly fought to overturn their murder verdicts. Sheppard's son, even after his father's legal exoneration (in a second trial) and death, is still trying to clear his name. Hanratty's case is interesting in that recent DNA tests determined that Hanratty was, in fact, guilty all along of the crime. In the Sacco and Vanzetti case, repeated ballistics tests proved that Sacco's pistol was used in the crime, but some elements of the media, ninety years on, still portray Sacco as an innocent man.

Many intelligent, credible people believed at the time (and some still do) in their innocence. Some cases get clouded with political/social overtones (such as the death penalty for a juvenile in Truscott's case) and the media plays its part in public perception.

It could even be said that at this point (with most of the original investigators and medical examiners deceased and the high probability that any evidence would have been destroyed or degraded years ago), that Truscott wasn't really going too far out on a limb in an attempt to clear his name at this point. This court (unlike previous ones) just decided in his favor.

Thanks for starting this topic, it prompted me to do some online research on this case. I had no idea that his conviction had been quashed and that he'd received a financial settlement. I also had never heard of Alexander Kalichuk as a suspect (although it doesn't seem he was ever conclusively linked to the area or to the victim). It makes me regret some of the interesting cases that UM didn't profile.

[Tighthead]

Originally Posted by Pus$y Galore

Baltovich? Not sure if I know 'bout that one. Do tell...

Google Robert Baltovich. Interesting case with a Bernardo angle. You can learn way more on search than from my inaccurate recollections.

There is a very good book on it.

[kadrmas15]

How was the killing? Was it sloppy? I am not sure if this guy did this or did not. But I will say people that are that age when they kill tend to be rather sloppy killers. That is not to say they always are sloppy but more often than not they are. But then again, there was a guy in Washington State who in the late 70's, early 80's, he had murdered someone and he was gosh, 14 or 15 and the girl he murdered was 12 or 13. Anyway, he had always been a suspect but was never charged, he got away with it for over 20 years. He was charged when the cops tricked him into licking an envelope (he did not know the cops were behind the envelope getting sent to him) and his DNA matched DNA found on the dead girl's body. To be honest, if he had admitted he had sex with her, he probably would not have been charged. But he denied ever having sex with her, so he got caught in a huge lie.

In terms of Canada, well I do not think the lack of a death penalty indicates a lack of a spine. The death penalty is archaic and is certainly nothing to be proud of and does not make any state or nation that has it 'tough' because they have it nor is it a sign of weakness to not have it. Crime rates are substantially lower in Canada even though they do not have the death penalty. Crime rates are also substantially lower in the states that do not have the death penalty as opposed to those that do have it. So regardless if your views I do not think it is a strength or weakness issue.

[Clockworkhigh]

Originally Posted by kadrmas15

In terms of Canada, well I do not think the lack of a death penalty indicates a lack of a spine. The death penalty is archaic and is certainly nothing to be proud of and does not make any state or nation that has it 'tough' because they have it nor is it a sign of weakness to not have it. Crime rates are substantially lower in Canada even though they do not have the death penalty. Crime rates are also substantially lower in the states that do not have the death penalty as opposed to those that do have it. So regardless if your views I do not think it is a strength or weakness issue.

We'll have to disagree on that one. There are too many cases in Canada where the courts are too lenient. Sometimes I catch myself saying "If they only committed that crime in California, Florida, Texas........"

Paul Bernardo is alive today thanks to no death penalty in Canada. That alone is enough reason for me to wish we still had it. While his victims, two schoolgirls and his OWN sister in-law are dead. God Bless Canada!