In the early evening of Tuesday June 9, 1959, 12-year-old Lynne Harper disappeared near RCAF Station, an air force base just south of Clinton, Ontario. At about 11:20 that evening, Lynne's father reported her missing. She was last seen with Steven Truscott.
Steven Murray Truscott (born January 18, 1945 in Vancouver, British Columbia) is a Canadian who was sentenced to death in 1959, when he was a 14 ½ year old student, for the murder of classmate Lynne Harper. They were classmates at the A.V.M. Hugh Campbell School on the air force base in Clinton.
After finishing dinner and wearing only blue shorts and a white sleeveless blouse, Lynne Harper walked over to the school grounds near her home and cheerfully helped Mrs. Nickerson with the younger Clinton Brownies.
Steven acknowledged being with Lynne the evening she was killed. He was seen with her on his bicycle after 7 p.m. in close proximity to Lawson’s Bush where her body was found two days later.
Steve Truscott has maintained since 1959 that he took Lynne Harper to the intersection of the county road and Highway 8 where Lynne got off his bike. Truscott maintains that he left her unharmed and that when he arrived at the bridge he looked back toward the intersection where he had dropped Lynne off and observed that a 1959 gray Chevrolet Bel Air had stopped and that she was in the process of entering the front seat.
The Short Version
As crimes go, dear reader, this is a simple crime. We have only two choices in this case. Either Steven Truscott took Lynne Harper 90 feet into Lawson’s bush and strangled her at his favorite spot or a stranger pedophile picked her up after Truscott left her all alone, drove around for several hours, and then returned her in the dark, not at the intersection but 90 feet into Lawson’s bush at Truscott’s favorite spot--the same place where Lynne’s body would be found two days later.
This is not rocket science folks; just searching for truth and justice using critical thinking.
The facts of this case implicating Steven Truscott go well beyond reasonable doubt and preponderance of the evidence, they comprise a moral certainty.
The Long Version
Steven Truscott’s Story:
Steven says he met Lynne at the Brownies and that she was in a chatty, presumably happy mood. He says that Lynne asked for a ride to Highway 8 so she could hitch a ride to a pony farm. He further stated that we pushed the bicycle between us across the school grounds onto the county road. There I got on the seat and she mounted the crossbar and we took off.
Steven goes on to say that he took Lynne to the intersection of the county road and Highway 8 where she got off his bike. Truscott has always maintained that he left her unharmed and when he arrived at the bridge he looked back toward the intersection where he had dropped Lynne off and observed that a 1959 gray Chevrolet Bel Air had stopped and that she was in the process of entering.
Steven saw the car speed east down the highway with Lynne in the front seat. We will hear that the stranger who just happened by a few minutes after Steven left her at the intersection happened to be a pedophile of the worst kind.
After being with the little 12-year old girl for several hours and not feeding her, this pedophile reversed direction and returned to the intersection where he picked up his victim. He brings poor Lynne back to the very area where people may be looking for the missing girl and are eyeing any strange movement.
This stranger does not leave Lynne out at the intersection. This pedophile goes a lot further because now he is in his raping, killing mood. He either parks along the county road or he turns left at a tractor trail and drives onto a woodlot area known locally as Lawson’s bush. There he stops the vehicle, opens the door, gets out, and leads his victim 90 feet to the very spot Steven uses when browsing in the bush area.
There the stranger rapes and strangles Lynne with her own blouse. He picks up her panties as a souvenir but drops them 33 feet away instead of taking them to his car.
This happens to be in the same bush area where Steven and Lynne were last seen together and where Lynne’s body would be found two days later.
Critical Thoughts
Perhaps it was Steven Truscott’s kind heart that caused him to give his young 12-year old girl friend a ride down the road. Unfortunately, this character of kindness was unable to wait a few minutes until the little girl hitched a ride. If Steven Truscott had been with Lynne Harper when she got a ride the driver would have known that there would be a witness if anything happened to her.
Gordon “Gord” Logan, who was 12 and family friends of the Truscott’s, was fishing in the river about 640 feet away from the bridge. Gord testified that he saw Steven and Lynne on their way to the highway and saw Steven come back alone, stop at the bridge and look back toward the highway. Did Steven say anything to his friend about Lynne getting a ride so quickly? Did he say anything at all to Gord?” Evidently he said nothing to his friend. Upon returning to the school grounds did he say anything to his schoolmates about Lynne getting a ride quickly in a brand new car? Steven made no comment to anyone about Lynne hitch-hiking, getting a ride, or seeing her get into a car.
The Jury and the Supreme Court of Canada
This may be what the original jury and the eight judges of the Supreme Court of Canada were thinking when they found Steven Truscott to be the person guilty of Lynne Harper’s murder: Steve Truscott did not take Lynne to Highway 8. Instead they left the county road before reaching the bridge over the Bayfield River. That is what most witnesses, who were out walking and swimming, have maintained all along.
Steven and Lynne walked over 80 feet into a wooded area beside the county road known as Lawson's Bush. There they did what many young boys and girls do in the woods and bushes to become better acquainted. Lynne took off her brown loafers, set them side by side, and rolled up her socks neatly. Perhaps the spot was awkward so they picked up her shoes and socks and walked a few feet to a more comfortable spot. There she took off her blue shorts and laid it neatly with her shoes and socks in a pile as they later would be found. She may have teased too much and gone too far; then tried to get Steven to stop. Now Truscott was too passionate and in no mood to stop. She may have said she would tell on him for trying to rape her. This and his frustration about his penetration may have caused him to strangle her, which he did so with her blouse.
Degree of Responsibility
Either Steven took Lynne to the intersection and left her to her fate of being picked up by a stranger pedophile who would drive off for several hours and then return her in the dark to a spot in the bush known to Steven and there he would strangle her (no chance in a million), or Steven took Lynne innocently into the bush and when things got out of hand he strangled her (very likely).
Even if Truscott’s unbelievable story were true he should still be held partly responsible for Lynne’s death because he took her to a vulnerable spot and left her alone to her fate. Any friend would have waited until the girl got a ride. Therefore, at the very least we are not looking for who is responsible for Lynne Harper’s death, but to what degree.
The Media, the Public and the Ontario Court of Appeal
Several books, a TV documentary, and many newspaper and magazines articles have been written or produced over the past 40 years. The media has put 90% of the sound-biting public into Truscott mania while the 10% who think critically know beyond any reasonable doubt that Steven Truscott killed Lynne Harper.
1966 March 24: The first public interest in the Truscott case was when journalist Isabel LeBourdais published The Trial of Steven Truscott, the first document to raise serious questions about the case and its outcome. The one-sided 240-page volume rekindled public debate and interest in the case and incensed many at how the justice system treated Steven Truscott. LeBourdais questioned the quick police investigation and trial procedures and believed that Truscott had been convicted of a crime he did not commit. A huge public outcry about the case erupted leading to the federal government asking for a Supreme Court review.
1971: Bill Trent's The Steven Truscott Story causes renewed interest in the crime. The first public interest was in the spring of 1966 when journalist Isabel LeBourdais published The Trial of Steven Truscott, the first document to raise serious questions about a young boy being sentenced to hang. This comes six years after Truscott’s death sentence was commuted to life.
1997 August 15: CBC’s Ffith Estate and James Lockyer are set to do a story on Truscott’s case and how his life had been since his release on parole in 1969. Mr. Lockyer is the Toronto lawyer who helped overturn the wrongful conviction of Guy Paul Morin for the death of Christine Jessop in 1984.
2000 March: For two years Julian Sher worked with CBC TV’s The Fifth Estate to produce an explosive documentary based on her book, "Until You Are Dead,” which was watched by more than 1.4 million Canadians. Truscott is interviewed in the documentary and vows to do everything in his power to clear his name.
The program unveils what they claim is new evidence to suggest that police may have been too hasty in pinning the murder on Truscott. After the broadcast public clamor to clear Steven Truscott's name grew rapidly sparking a Truscott craze across the country and questions in Parliament.
James Lockyer takes on Truscott's case.
2001 November 28: Lawyers for the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted file a 700-page brief with the federal justice minister to have Truscott's case reopened, as the public outcry against the original jury decision grows into Truscott mania.
Steven Truscott Acquitted by the Ontario Court of Appeal
2007 Aug. 28: More than 48 years after the crime, the court overturns Truscott's conviction, declaring the case "a miscarriage of justice" that "must be quashed." Michael Bryant, Ontario's attorney general, tells reporters the Crown has no plans to appeal and offers Truscott an apology. However, the judges also said that "the court is not satisfied that the appellant has been able to demonstrate his factual innocence."
In not finding Truscott innocent the court of appeal wrote: ". . . certain immutable facts cast some suspicion on Mr. Truscott. He was the last known person to see the victim alive and was with her at a location very close to where she was murdered.”
Compensation for Truscott
2008 July 7: The Ontario government announces it will pay Truscott $6.5 million in compensation for his ordeal. "We are doing what we can to bring to the conclusion this remarkable aspect of Mr. Truscott's life's journey," Chris Bentley, Ontario's attorney general, says during the announcement. Robins recommended that the federal government pay 50 per cent of the compensation. Bentley said Ontario is paying it in full for now, to ensure Truscott gets his compensation quickly, but that negotiations with the federal government are ongoing. Truscott is calling the Ontario government's C$6.5 million compensation package for his murder conviction "bittersweet." He says money will never truly pay back the years of his life lost while in prison.
Truscott’s wife got C$100,000 and the federal/province paid C$990,000 in legal aid bills.
Lynn Harper’s sacrifice: The real victim in this case is the robust, energetic12-year old girl in the Harper household. She lost her life but may have saved other innocent girls from losing their lives. Perhaps while in prison Truscott got himself together and learned to control his psychopathic tendencies. He probably never killed again and instead set his goal to convince himself and everyone else that he was not the killer. The gullible public did him one better—awarded him C$6.5 million dollars for his crime.
The Clue Master SDM
No comments:
Post a Comment