29
TORONTO — Once hailed as the dean of his profession, disgraced pathologist Dr. Charles Smith will answer for his mistakes Monday at an inquiry probing systemic errors in pediatric forensics that resulted in innocent parents spending years behind bars, accused of murdering their children.
After months of testimony from experts and former colleagues, Dr. Smith will submit to the scrutiny of a room full of lawyers all seeking insight into how pediatric pathology, on so many occasions, served only to undercut the justice system and compound the tragedy of a child's death.
At the outset of the inquiry, Dr. Smith's lawyer read a statement in which his client said he was “truly sorry” for the “mistakes” he's made in his work.
Among those whose lives were torn apart by those mistakes are several mothers who were jailed for years until the cases against them fell apart, and a man who was finally exonerated after spending more than a decade in prison for the death of his niece.
Another couple, convicted of murdering their son, have had their convictions quashed and face new trials ordered by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Parents and relatives affected by Dr. Smith's mistakes will be looking Monday for more than just another apology, said lawyer Peter Wardle.
“Many of them have waited 10 — in one case 20 — years to hear him give his side of the story,” said Mr. Wardle, who represents several of the families.
“They all have questions they want answered.”
Although his clients felt the apology delivered in November was “too little, too late,” they're anxious to hear what Smith has to say, Mr. Wardle added.
The inquiry was called after serious doubts were raised about opinions given by Dr. Smith in some 20 cases of suspicious child death. In more than a dozen of those cases, Dr. Smith's opinions led to criminal proceedings or convictions.
Although the inquiry's mandate is much broader than just Dr. Smith's work — it has been ordered to report on systemic errors that exist in Ontario's pediatric pathology system — lead commission counsel Linda Rothstein said Dr. Smith's appearance will be significant.
“We've spent a lot of time reviewing Dr. Smith's work over a long period of time, and particularly with reference to approximately 20 cases,” said Ms. Rothstein.
“We want to hear from him, what he has to say about what's been said and how he explains some of the questions that have been asked about what he did.”
Justice Stephen Goudge, who is leading the judicial probe, is expected to report his findings and make recommendations on restoring confidence in the system in April.
It's hoped that Dr. Smith's testimony will aid in those efforts, said Ms. Rothstein.
“We're always hopeful that someone in Dr. Smith's position will be able to share with us some very candid insights about how this occurred,” she said.
“And how he, having lived obviously through a very difficult time, would counsel others to avoid it in the first place.”
Dr. Smith's work in pediatric forensic pathology at Toronto's renowned Hospital for Sick Children came to an end in 2005 when he resigned.
Dr. Smith, who briefly worked as a pathologist in Saskatoon after leaving Toronto, said in his statement that any mistakes “were made honestly and without any intention to harm or obstruct the pediatric death investigations.”
William Mullins-Johnson was one such case. After spending 12 years in jail for the death of his niece, his conviction was quashed after six experts found no evidence to support Dr. Smith's conclusion that the girl had been sodomized and asphyxiated.
Although Dr. Smith's testimony has been highly anticipated, Ms. Rothstein said much about the pitfalls of forensic pathology has already been learned from the hearings.
“This isn't about one man or one man's cases,” she said.
The commission has had its “eyes opened” to the frailty of the underlying science, the difficulty in recruiting people into pediatric forensic pathology, and the challenges posed when forensic experts testify in court, Ms. Rothstein said.
“Those problems will continue. Even the commissioner's recommendations cannot possibly hope to avoid some of these difficulties in the future,” she said.
“But we hope they will go some way to both restoring confidence and ensuring these problems will be minimized.”
