Summaries of Moore's Trials

John is hard at work writing a book about his unjust conviction and his struggle for justice. In the course of doing that work, he has methodically gone through the thousands of pages of transcript from both of his trials and prepared summaries of them. He asked me to post the summaries here.

No evidence linking me to Mr. Lanthier's murder and robbery at First Trial 1979, second trial 1982.

The following pages is a summary of 3,000 pages of trial transcripts, into 19 pages of trial transcripts from two trials, 1979 winter trial, and the 1982 fall trial. The first trial in January 1979, there were 35 witnesses at the first trial and 33 of those witnesses and their evidence, absolutely and unequivocally don't link me to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. At the second trial fall of 1982, there were ten less witnesses's. At the second trial there was 25 witnesses's, 23 of those witnesses's and their evidence absolutely and unequivocally don't link me to Mr. Lanthier's murder and robbery.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ONTARIO

Regina vs. John Caleb Moore, Gordon Simon Stevens and Terrance Hogan.

Mr. N. Douglas: For The Crown Attorney
Mr. D. Gaetz: Lawyer for John Caleb Moore (Johnny) AN INNOCENT MAN.
Mr. K. Smyth: Lawyer for Gordon Simon Stevens (Gordy) GUILTY!
Miss L. Rudolph: Lawyer for Terrance Robert Hogan (Robert) GUILTY!

At the first trial on January 15-30, 1979, 27 Crown witnesses did not link me to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. The other two witnesses, Gordon Stevens and John C. Moore didn't link me to Mr. Lanthier's murder and robbery either. All witnesses and a summary of their evidence are listed below:

1.Sergeant Shanahan, {91 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages104-135, 142-147, 188-243}Crown Police witness, no DNA, no physical and no finger print evidence. Sergeant Shanahan's 91 pages of evidence absolutely doesn't link, John C. Moore too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
2.Mrs. Joan Cole, {11 pages of evidence , volume 1, pages 147-158}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
3.Miss Shirley Lewis, {11 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages 158-169}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
4.Miss Marian Taylor-Bailey, {8 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages 169-177}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
5.Mr. Alan Gavin, {11 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages 177-188}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
6.Mr. Lloyd James Leach, {volume 1, page 144}Crown witness, No evidence presented by this witness.
7.Mr. Dale Lloyd, {volume 1, page 144}Crown witness, No evidence presented by this witness.
8.Mr. Norman Edward Erickson, {16 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages 245-261}Professional Crown witness, he is an Analysis for Forensic Sciences in Toronto, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
9.Constable Allan Rains, {8 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages 261-269}Crown Police witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
10.Detective Eric Overman, {14 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages 269-283}Crown Police witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
11.Miss Holly Overland, {15 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 345-360}Crown Police witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
12.Mr. Scott Overland , {15 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 360-375}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
13.Mr. Tim Lanthier , {2 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 375-377}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
14.Ms. Joyce McLaughlin , {9 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 377-386}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
15.Doctor Bendra Rasaiah Pathologist , {34 pages of evidence, volume 2&3. page 435 / vol 3 436-469}Professional Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. No DNA and No Physical evidence.
16.Detective Hugh Morrow , {21 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 470-491}Police Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
17.Mrs. Sylvia Nichols , {13 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 616-629}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
18.Mr. Ronald Bernie Bugie, {3 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 631-634}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
19.Ms. Darlene Joy Marshall, {61 pages of evidence, volume 3&4, pages 635-650 / vol 4 651-697}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. There is clear evidence in Ms. Marshall's evidence, that suggest she knew of Robert Hogan's knife, that he used in the murder of Mr. Lanthier. This would make her an accessory after the fact to murder. Yet no charges where filed against her.
20.Mrs. Eleanor Boreham , {23 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 698-721}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Mrs. Boreham was an extremely nervous and confused witness, with times and days in her evidence.
21.Ms. Barbara Pasqua , {12 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 722-734 / [page 726-628, suggest accessory after the fact to murder. No mention of asking Mr. Hogan to pull a job behind Royal Bank.]}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. There is clear evidence in Ms. Pasqua's evidence, that suggest she knew of Robert Hogan's knife, that he used in the murder of Mr. Lanthier. Ms. Pasqua and Lee Anne Ledyit, washed Mr. Hogans clothing with blood on it. Therefore, washing DNA evidence off Mr. Hogan's clothing. This would make her an accessory after the fact to murder. Yet no charges where filed against her.
22.Miss. Lee Anne Ledyit, {35 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 735-770, [page 747-750 & 760 & 766 lines 25-32, suggest accessory after the fact to murder. At page 758 line 3, suggest mistrial.]}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Lee Anne Ledyit, washed Mr. Hogans clothing with blood on them. Therefore, washing DNA evidence off Mr. Hogan's clothing. This would make her an accessory after the fact to murder. Yet no charges where filed against her. Miss Ledyit was asked this question by my lawyer, Mr. Gaetz, Question: I see who told you that? Answer: “I can't remember if it was the Crown Attorney or a Detective.” This suggest a miss trial that could have been called!
23.Mr. Michael Dorhety, {14 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 771-785, page 777 makes it clear that there was no discussion about robbing a cab driver. The alleged discussion was about a confectionary store. On page 782 lines 14-23, Mr. Dorhety states that there was no discussion about a job.}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Mr. Dorhety's, evidence, was allegedly of robbing a confectionery store. In Mr. Dorhety's, there is no evidence suggesting robbing a taxi-driver.
24.Mr. Ivan Walter McCrieght, {10 pages of evidence, Volume 4, pages 786-796, confused witness, at page 9 lines, 24-28, Mr. McCrieght states he didn't know anyone else at Darlene's place.} Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. After, four cross-examinations by four different Lawyers, there is not a shred of evidence that suggest that Mr. McCrieght knew me, John C. Moore, personally. In his own words, “I don't know the other two guys, that where there.” (Q: Did you know them? A: “No, I just met them that night eh.”) [Volume 4, Page 794 at lines 24 to 28].
25.Mr. Chris McDonald, {2 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 797-799}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
26.Mr. Leslie Lorne Williams, {2 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 800-802}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
27.Mr. Donald Nevitt, {13 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 803-816 [there is no acknowledgment that Mr. Nevitt even knew me, at page 807 lines 18-32 / 808 lines 4-10, Mr. Nevitt was asked this Q: “was Gordon Steven by himself?” A: “Yes, sir.”]}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. After, three cross-examinations by three different Lawyers, there is not a shred of evidence that suggest that Mr. Nevitt knew me, John C. Moore, personally.
28.Mr. Gordon Simon Stevens, {217 pages of evidence, volume 6&7, pages 1024-1180 / vol 7 pages 1181-1241} witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
29.Mr. John Caleb Moore's {164 pages of evidence, volume 5, pages 859-1022} suggest I had no idea that a cab driver was to be killed and robbed. Nor was I involved in any planning of the crime. Actually, I was found not guilty of a plan and deliberate murder! Officer Burn's evidence was of a conversation of utterances between Gordon and I, and under oath he stated, his notes where somewhat scratchy and some what distorted! At times Stevens and I where talking at the same time so he didn't write those parts down and he left information out of his scratchy notes. That information left out could have been the key evidence confirming my innocence! Adding to this, the fact that Constable Burns stating that his written notes were not clear raises doubt in what was alleged to have been said by Stevens and I in the holding cells on August 3, 1978.

I, John Caleb Moore, do solemnly, sincerely, and truly affirm that I absolutely and unequivocally did not kill Mr. Donald Lanthier.

I, John Caleb Moore, do solemnly, sincerely, and truly affirm that I absolutely and unequivocally did not know that Mr. Gordon Stevens or Mr. Robert Hogan had any weapons upon their person.

I, John Caleb Moore, do solemnly, sincerely, and truly affirm that I absolutely and unequivocally did not form an intention in common to rob the deceased with either Mr. Nichols or Mr. Stevens or Mr. Hogan.

There was speculation that there may have been a prier conversation, but speculation is not factual.

Actually, there were three of the Crown's witnesses's, Darlene Joy Marshall, Barbara Pasqua and Lee Anne Ledyit, whom admitted under oath that they knew about Mr. Hogan's weapon and knew of the blood on Mr. Hogan's clothing. Yet they washed Mr. Hogan's clothing that had blood or DNA evidence on them and gave Mr. Hogan's knife to Mr. Stevens for disposal. So these three Crown's witnesses could have been and should have been charged with accessories after the fact. All three witnesses, “should have or ought to have known”. The Crown chose not to charge these three woman. And why not?

I have this great sadness in my heart for my wrongful unconstitutional second degree murder conviction. I feel an overwhelming of sadness for the people who have unfairly judged me with no physical or DNA evidence. All they had was circumstantial evidence, hear-say evidence, lies, inconsistent statements, deep rooted racial beliefs among the Non-Aboriginal Sault Ste. Marie jurors, bias jury selection, inaccurate police notes and adverse and hostile Crown Witnesses constitutes doubt and therefore, I should have received the benefit of the doubt, which I am entitled to by law. Other witnesses were vague, sometimes inconsistent and sometimes contradictory.

My unconstitutional second degree murder conviction was based not upon any credible or factual evidence, but my unconstitutional second degree murder conviction was based on, simply upon an appeal to racism rather than reason and on the concealment of the truth. Racism played an extremely big part in my second degree murder conviction!

It was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that I was not present when the crime was committed. I played no part whatsoever in planning or executing the June 30, 1978 murder and robbery of Mr. Donald Lanthier, the Sault Ste. Marie, taxi driver. It was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that I was not present when the crime was committed. I played no part whatsoever in planning or executing the June 30, 1978 murder and robbery of Mr. Donald Lanthier, the Sault Ste. Marie, taxi driver.

My sole connection to the crime was that I spent time earlier that same day with Gordon Stevens and Robert Hogan, in Rick Nichol's car. Gordon Stevens and Robert Hogan, are the two men who did commit the June 30, 1978 murder of Mr. Lanthier. What ever Mr. Gordon Stevens and Mr. Robert Hogan did, they did of their own volition! I am not legally, liable for the irreversible actions of what Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hogan did to Mr. Donald Lanthier.

At the first trial on January 15-30, 1979, 27 Crown plus Gordon Stevens and John C. Moore witnesses don't link me to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. So far we have 29 witnesses that absolutely don't link me to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.

The seven remaining witnesses are listed below:

30. Detective Paul Doiren, {57 pages of evidence, volume 1&2, pages 283-300 / vol 301-345}Crown Police witness, his questionable evidence is from a Police Officer's point of view. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction. I made it very clear to Detective Doiron that I did not plan any type of crime and I did not kill Mr. Donald Lanthier. The fact that I was acquitted of a planned and deliberate act of murder, shows you that there was no plan. Actually, with this witness, there is absolutely no evidence that suggest that I was a part of murdering and robbing Mr. Donald Lanthier, The Sault Ste. Marie Taxi-driver.
31. Constable Gary Burn, admissible in law, {47 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 387-434}Crown Police witness, his questionable evidence is from a Police Officer's point of view. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction. In the trial transcripts, volume 2, at page 422 and at lines 28 and 29, Constable states under oath that his notes were scratchy. He also states under oath that he left information out of his written notes, because Mr. Stevens and I were talking at the same time and too fast at times. There were many discrepancies in Constable Burn's scratchy and distorted notes of utterances, between the written and typed version! Those inaccurate, scratchy and distorted notes and that information, that was left out of Constable Burn's notes of the conversation of utterances could have been the key evidence confirming my innocence! With this in mind, by what Constable Burn's stated under oath about his inaccurate and distorted written notes of utterances, this would make it very clear and it also raises doubt in what was alleged to have been said, by Mr. Stevens and myself, in the holding cells on August 3, 1978, at 11:45 p.m.
32. Mr. Robert Terrance Hogan , Admissible in law, {133 pages of evidence, volume 7, pages 1242-1375} Crown witness, Mr. Hogan's August 3, 1978, statement is how I was implicated and dragged through this racist court system in the first place. At the first trial. Mr. Justice Stark warned the Non-Aboriginal jury that while Mr. Hogan's statement was admissible as evidence, “it is binding only against the man who made it and cannot be used against the others allegedly involved!” In one part of Mr. Hogan's statement, he claims that I threaten his life is he didn't kill the cab driver, which is false because, I absolutely and unequivocally did not threaten Mr. Hogan's life, in any way whatsoever. I believe he some how confused me with Mr. Stevens. Then Mr. Hogan alleges that I gave Mr. Stevens a bunch of phone numbers, for for a number of taxi-drivers. There is no evidence to show that this piece of paper with taxi numbers on it ever exchanged hands. It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that I was not present when Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hogan, killed and robbed Mr. Donald Lanthier. I absolutely and unequivocally did not play and active role in planning or executing the June 30, 1978, murder and robbery of Mr. Donald Lanthier, the Sault Ste. Marie, Taxi-driver. My sole connection to the June 30, 1978 murder and robbery of Mr. Donald Lanthier, was spending time earlier that same day with Rick Nichols, Gordon Stevens and Robert Hogan. What ever Mr. Gordon Stevens and Mr. Robert Hogan did, they did of their own volition! I, John C. Moore, am not legally or liable for the irreversible actions of the principal offenders, Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hogan the principal offenders.
33. Mr. Richard Nichols, admissible in law, {123 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 492-615} lying Crown witness, (he is white), his evidence consisted of five inconsistent statements, which where subject to a void dire! My sole connection to the crime was just being in Rick Nichol's car with Gordon Stevens and Robert Hogan earlier in the day and then again when Rick dropped Stevens and Hogan off that evening around 11:30 p.m. on June 29, 1978, around Goulais Ave and Douglas street. That is about the closest I came to the murder and robbery of Mr. Lanthier. Back then I never had my drivers licence. It was Rick Nichols who asked me if I would like to go for a ride that evening. In Rick's evidence there are numerous times he lied, by saying I made certain alleged comments about what Gordon and Terry had said while existing Ricks car that evening. Those alleged comments where never made by me or to me by Gordon Stevens or Robert Hogan. There were clear inconsistencies and contradiction in Rick Nichols evidence. Mr. Nichol's evidence absolutely don't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
34. Officer John Campbell, {7 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 817-824, [At 819 lines 25-28, six words]}Crown Police witness, his evidence was of an alleged whispering comment that I allegedly made and directed at Mr. Robert Hogan. The words that were allegedly used by me and Officer John Campbell supposedly over heard were these words, “you fucken snitch, you fucken squealer.” Six words out of his eight pages of evidence. I know for a fact I didn't use such words, because those words where not part of my vocabulary. I never heard such words, “you fucken snitch, you fucken squealer”, until I was imprison, for a murder that I absolutely and unequivocally did not commit or had any part in. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction.
35. Officer George T. Burmasters, {8 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 824-832, [At page 827 lines 20-22, one sentence.]}Crown Police witness, his evidence was of an alleged conversation he allegedly overheard through an inch or two inch crack in the door of court room C, Justice Boyd's Court room, between Mr. Stevens and myself. This alleged conversation was what Mr. Stevens, allegedly had said, “There are only four of us that know what happen that night. One is dead, you, me and Hogan.” Nine pages of evidence of an alleged conversation and those two sentences are the ones that stick out at the first trial. This alleged conversation absolutely and unequivocally did not transpire, between Mr. Stevens and myself. This alleged conversation could happen anywhere, between the court house and city jail. Yet Officer Burmasters, by chance overhears this alleged conversation through a crack in a court room door, which was about an inch or two. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction.
36. Detective Donald Sadowski, {23 pages of evidence, volume 4, pages 832-855}Crown Police witness, his evidence is all hear say evidence. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction. There is not physical or DNA evidence that links me too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Mr. Hogan's statement is what implicated me in the murder of Mr. Donald Lanthier in the first place. But, it is clear in Mr. Hogan's statement, that Detective Sadowski's took, that Mr. Hogan said he planned it and he also stated that he stabbed the Taxi-driver Mr. Donald Lanthier many times.

SUMMARY OF THE FACTS:
After, Crown Attorney Norman Douglas, closed his case in 1979, In Regina vs. John C. Moore, there was absolutely no evidence to go to a Non-Aboriginal jury properly instructed that Mr. Moore planned a premeditated murder. Because, I absolutely and unequivocally did not kill Mr. Donald Lanthier the Sault Ste. Marie, Taxi-driver. Mr. Justice Stark stated this in court, “I don't see any great difficultly in protecting Mr. Gaetz's client John C. Moore, with respect to utterances made by others, which shouldn't be used as implication him.”

At the first trial there was roughly 1,795 pages of evidence that was presented, on January 15-30, 1979, including 56 exhibits. There was absolutely no factual evidence that was presented that linked me, John C. Moore to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. There were 36 witnesses that presented their evidence in front of a Judge and Non-Aboriginal jurors, and 34 of those witnesses, their evidence absolutely don't link me to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.

---

---

Note: No evidence linking me to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery at second trial 1982 fall.

At the second trial in September 1982, there were 25 witnesses called, 10 less than the first trial and all 25 witnesses, had absolutely no factual evidence, that linked me too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Actually, it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that I wasn't present when Mr. Lanthier was murder and robbed, by Mr. Gordon Stevens and Mr. Robert Hogan. To make it very clear, crystal clear, I am not legally responsible for the irreversible actions or Mr. Stevens or Mr. Hogan. What ever Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hogan did, they did of their own volition and that is a fact! I absolutely and unequivocally did not play an active role in planning or executing the June 30, 1978 murder and robbery of Mr. Donald Lanthier, the Sault Ste. Marie, Taxi-driver. Nor am I, legally responsible or liable for the death of Mr. Donald Lanthier. I am sincerely sorry, for Mr. Lanthier's death, but I absolutely and unequivocally did not play an active role in his death! My sole connection to the crime, was being in Rick Nichol's car earlier that day, with Mr. Stevens and Mr. Robert Hogan and again later on that evening, when Rick Nichols gave Gordon and Robert a ride to the West end of the city and dropped them off.

IN THE SURPREME COURT OF ONTARIO

BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Complainant

- and -

JOHN CALEB MOORE Accused

T R I A L P R O C E E D I N G S

Before THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE WALSH, and a Non-Aboriginal jury, at the sittings of the Assizes, in the Court House at Sault Ste. Marie, in the District of Algoma; commencing at 12 o'clock noon on Monday, the 20th of September 1982. September 20-30, 1982.

A P P E A R A N C E S:

NORMAN DOULAS Esq.: For The Crown Attorney
FRANK R. CAPUTO, Esq. Q.C.: Lawyer for John Caleb Moore AN INNOCENT MAN.
-and-
RODERICK W.A. SONLEY, Esq.

At the second trial on, September 20-30, 1982, 25 Crown witnesses did not link me to Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. All witnesses and a summary of their evidence are listed below:

WITNESSES AND THEIR EVIDENCE.

Monday -- September 20, 1982

1.Sergeant Shanahan, {55 pages of evidence was read in and 36 less pages than my first trial 1979, volume 1, pages 102-157}Crown Police witness, no DNA, no physical and no finger print evidence. Sergeant Shanahan is the Sault Ste. Identification Officer. Sergeant Shanahan's 55 pages of evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Detective Ivan Shanahan, his evidence was read in. His evidence was in the capacity of the Police Identification Officer, photographer, and finger printing, his job is gather evidence and tag it and then present it. His evidence did not link me to the crime scene. There were no solid facts in his evidence that linked me to the murder of Mr. Lanthier.

Tuesday -- September 21, 1982

2.Miss Shirley Lewis, {10 pages of evidence was read in 1 less page than my first trial 1979, volume 1, pages 159-169}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. She was the Dispatcher with Steel City Cab.
3.Miss Marian Taylor-Bailey, {7 pages of evidence was read in 1 page less than my first trial 1979, volume 1, pages 170-177}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. She was the Dispatcher with Steel City Cab.
4.Mr. Alan Gavin, {10 pages of evidence was read in, 1 page less than my first trial 1979, volume 1, pages 177-188}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Pete Gavin was a Steel City Cab driver.
5.Constable Allan Rains, {9 pages of evidence was read in three more than my first trial 1979, volume 1, pages 186-195}Crown Police witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
6.Mrs. Joan Cole, {10 pages of evidence was read in 1 less page than my first trial 1979, volume 1, pages 195-205}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
7.Miss Holly Overland, {11 pages of evidence was read in 3 less pages than my first trial 1979, volume 1, pages 206-217}Crown Police witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
8.Mr. Tim Lanthier , {2 pages of evidence was read in, volume 1, pages 216-217}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
9.Detective Hugh Morrow, {35 pages of evidence, volume 1, pages 218-253}Police Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
10.Detective Donald Sadowski, {36 pages of evidence 13 more pages than my first trial 1979, volume 1&2, pages 253-285 / vol.2 pages 287-291}Crown Police witness, his evidence is all hear say evidence. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction. There is not physical or DNA evidence that links me too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Mr. Hogan's statement is what implicated me in the murder of Mr. Donald Lanthier in the first place. But, it is clear in Mr. Hogan's statement, that Detective Sadowski's took, that Mr. Hogan said he planned it and he also stated that he stabbed the Taxi-driver Mr. Donald Lanthier many times.

Wednesday -- September 22, 1982

Detective Donald Sadowski, (resumes)[In-chf by Mr. Douglas (continued), Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo, Re-ex by Mr. Douglas]{36 pages of evidence 13 more pages than my first trial 1979, volume 1&2, pages 253-285 / vol.2 pages 287-291}Detective Donald Sadowski, {36 pages of evidence 13 more pages than my first trial 1979, volume 1&2, pages 253-285 / vol.2 pages 287-291}.
11.Constable Gary Burn, admissible in law, [Was subject to a void dire.], {46 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 291-337, In-chf by Mr. Douglas 291, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 320, Re-ex by Mr. Douglas 334.} Crown Police witness, his questionable evidence is from a Police Officer's point of view. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction. In the first trial transcripts 1979, in volume 2, at page 422 and at lines 28 and 29, Constable states under oath that his notes were scratchy. He also states under oath that he left information out of his written notes, because Mr. Stevens and I were talking at the same time and too fast at times. There were many discrepancies in Constable Burn's scratchy and distorted notes of utterances, between the written and typed version! On page 308 at lines 28-30: A JURY MAN: My lord, we, the (Non-Aboriginal) jurors, were wondering if we could have the report given by the Constable here, that he gave this morning – have it re-read to us.? On page 309 at lines 3-4: It was confusing to us as to who was doing the speaking back and forth. Near the end of Officer Burn's evidence there was some confusion! Those inaccurate, scratchy and distorted notes and that information, that was left out of Constable Burn's notes of the conversation of utterances could have been the key evidence confirming my innocence! With this in mind, by what Constable Burn's stated under oath about his inaccurate and distorted written notes of utterances, this would make it very clear and it also raises doubt in what was alleged to have been said, by Mr. Stevens and myself, in the holding cells on August 3, 1978, at 11:45 p.m. In cross-examination, Officer Burns said he left parts of the conversation of utterances out of his notes. He also said his notes were scratchy. He also said he may have missed parts of the conversation of utterances. He even said his written version of the conversation of utterances were somewhat distorted. Mr. Burns said, and I quote: "They talked about many things, I did not write everything down in my notes." He also said, and I quote: "My notes look somewhat distorted." The type version of Officer Burn's inaccurate notes, where not the mirror image of his written version, but the opposite of them.
12.Mr. Richard Nichols, admissible in law, [Was subject to a void dire.] {120 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 337-457} lying Crown witness, (he is white), his evidence consisted of five inconsistent statements, which where subject to a void dire! My sole connection to the crime was just being in Rick Nichol's car with Gordon Stevens and Robert Hogan earlier in the day and then again when Rick dropped Stevens and Hogan off that evening around 11:30 p.m. on June 29, 1978, around Goulais Ave and Douglas street. That is about the closest I came to the murder and robbery of Mr. Lanthier. Back then I never had my drivers licence. It was Rick Nichols who asked me if I would like to go for a ride that evening. In Rick's evidence there are numerous times he lied, by saying I made certain alleged comments about what Gordon and Terry had said while existing Ricks car that evening. Those alleged comments where never made by me or to me by Gordon Stevens or Robert Hogan. There were clear inconsistencies and contradiction in Rick Nichols evidence. Mr. Nichol's evidence absolutely don't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.

Thursday – September 23, 1982

Mr. Richard Nichols, admissible in law, (resumes) In-chf by Mr. Douglas (continued), Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo, Re-ex by Mr. Douglas. [Was subject to a void dire.] {120 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 337-457} lying Crown witness, (he is white), his evidence consisted of five inconsistent statements, which where subject to a void dire!

13.Mr. Donald Nevitt, {10 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 457-467, (In-chf by Mr. Douglas 457, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 467.) [at the first trial 1979, there was no acknowledgment that Mr. Nevitt ever knew me at the first trial, at page 807 lines 18-32 / 808 lines 4-10, Mr. Nevitt was asked this Q: “was Gordon Steven by himself?” A: “Yes, sir.”]}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. After, three cross-examinations by three different Lawyers, there is not a shred of evidence that suggest that Mr. Nevitt knew me, John C. Moore, personally. On page 459 at lines 10-20, it appears that Mr. Nevitt was either coached by the Crown or Police, because it appears that he knows me more personally at the second trial September 1982.
14.Ellie Stone (Mrs. Eleanor Boreham), {9 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 467-475, ( In-chf by Mr. Douglas 467, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 474)} Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Ellie Stone (Mrs. Boreham) was an extremely nervous and confused witness, with times and days in her evidence at the first trial 1979. Miss Stone was extremely confused and nervous at the second trial as well. Miss Stone's evidence at the second trial was 14 pages less than my first trial. The Crown even suggested that Miss Stone was confused as well.
15.Ms. Darlene Joy Marshall, Hearsay evidence {27 pages of evidence, volume 2 pages 476-503, 34 pages more than my first trial 1979. (In-chf by Mr. Douglas 476, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 498.)}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. There is clear evidence in Ms. Marshall's evidence, that suggest she knew of Robert Hogan's knife, that he used in the murder of Mr. Lanthier. This would make her an accessory after the fact to murder. Yet no charges where filed against her.
16.Ms. Barbara Phillips, {23 pages of evidence, volume 2, pages 503-526, 11 more pages of evidence than my first trial.(In-chf by Mr. Douglas 503, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 512.) } [page 726-628, suggest accessory after the fact to murder at the first trial 1979. No mention in first trial 1979 trial transcript, that I was asking Mr. Hogan to pull a job behind Royal Bank.] But at the second trial 1982, there was a mention of me and Mr. Hogan allegedly speaking of pulling a job. There was no alleged conversation between Mr. Hogan, Mr. Steven or Myself, that Ms. Phillips (Ms. Pasqua) could have overheard. The only job I mention was a legitimate job in Elliot Lake at Denison Mines Ltd. Which could have been some confusion in her evidence at the second trial. Crown witness, Barbara Phillip's evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. There is clear evidence in Ms. Barbara Phillips, (Ms. Pasqua's) evidence, that suggest she knew of Robert Hogan's knife, that he used in the murder of Mr. Lanthier. Also, Ms. Pasqua and Lee Anne Ledyit, washed Mr. Hogans clothing with blood on it. Therefore, washing DNA evidence off Mr. Hogan's clothing. This would make her an accessory after the fact to murder. Yet no charges where filed against her.

Friday -- September 24, 1982

17.Mr. Robert Terrance Hogan , Admissible in law, In-chf by Mr. Douglas {55 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 527-582, there are 78 pages less, than my first Trial 1979.} Crown witness, Mr. Hogan's August 3, 1978, statement is how I was implicated and dragged through this racist court system in the first place. At the first trial. Mr. Justice Stark warned the Non-Aboriginal jury that while Mr. Hogan's statement was admissible as evidence, “it is binding only against the man who made it and cannot be used against the others allegedly involved!” In one part of Mr. Hogan's statement, he claims that I threaten his life is he didn't kill the cab driver, which is false because, I absolutely and unequivocally did not threaten Mr. Hogan's life, in any way whatsoever. I believe he some how confused me with Mr. Stevens. Then Mr. Hogan alleges that I gave Mr. Stevens a bunch of phone numbers, for a number of taxi-drivers. There is no evidence to show that this piece of paper with taxi numbers on it ever exchanged hands. It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that I was not present when Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hogan, killed and robbed Mr. Donald Lanthier. I absolutely and unequivocally did not play and active role in planning or executing the June 30, 1978, murder and robbery of Mr. Donald Lanthier, the Sault Ste. Marie, Taxi-driver. My sole connection to the June 30 , 1978 murder and robbery of Mr. Donald Lanthier, was spending time earlier that same day with Rick Nichols, Gordon Stevens and Robert Hogan. What ever Mr. Gordon Stevens and Mr. Robert Hogan did, they did of their own volition! I, John C. Moore, am not legally or liable for the irreversible actions of the principal offenders, Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hogan the principal offenders. Under oath at the second trial 1982, stated 222 times that he doesn't remembering making his inaccurate and lying statement. And I absolutely and unequivocally did not adopt Mr. Hogan's statement in anyway shape or form! I, John Caleb Moore, do solemnly and sincerely, and truly affirm that I absolutely and unequivocally did not kill Mr. Donald Lanthier. I, John Caleb Moore, do solemnly and sincerely, and truly affirm that I absolutely and unequivocally did not know that Mr. Gordon Stevens or Mr. Robert Hogan had any weapons upon their person. I, John Caleb Moore, do solemnly and sincerely, and truly affirm that I absolutely and unequivocally did not form an intention in common to rob the deceased Mr. Lanthier with either Mr. Nichols, Mr. Stevens or Mr. Hogan. THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE WALSH, ruled in a void dire, that Mr. Robert Hogan was adverse and hostile witness for the Crown. Which eliminates Mr. Robert Hogan as the Crown's number one key witness. That mean Mr. Hogan's August 3, 1978 statement is not evidence against me, it's only evidence against himself.

Monday -- September 27, 1982

Mr. Robert Terrance Hogan , Admissible in law, (resumes) Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo, Re-ex by Mr. Douglas {55 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 527-582, there are 78 pages less, than my first Trial 1979.} Crown witness, Mr. Hogan's August 3, 1978, statement is how I was implicated and dragged through this racist court system in the first place. At the first trial. Mr. Justice Stark warned the Non-Aboriginal jury that while Mr. Hogan's statement was admissible as evidence, “it is binding only against the man who made it and cannot be used against the others allegedly involved!”

18.Mr. Michael Dorhety, {18 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 582-600, there are 4 more pages than my first trial 1979. (In-chf by Mr. Douglas 582, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 593.)} [On page 777 vol 4, at the first trial, makes it clear that there was no discussion about robbing a cab driver. The alleged discussion was about a confectionary store. On page 782 lines 14-23, Mr. Dorhety states that there was no discussion about a job. There was never any alleged discussion on any criminal active. The only discussion was a job that was offered at Denison Mines Ltd.] Crown witness, Mr. Michael Dorhety's evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Mr. Dorhety's, evidence, was allegedly of robbing a confectionery store. In Mr. Dorhety's, there is no evidence suggesting robbing a taxi-driver.
19.Miss. Lee Anne Ledyit, {19 pages of evidence, volume 3, pages 601-620, 16 pages less than my first trial 1979. (In-chf by Mr. Douglas 601, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 612, Re-ex by Mr. Douglas 620.) [At my first trial 1979, Vol 4 pages 747-750 & 760 & 766 lines 25-32, suggest accessory after the fact to murder. At page 758 line 3, suggest mistrial.]}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. Lee Anne Ledyit, washed Mr. Hogans clothing with blood on them. Therefore, washing DNA evidence off Mr. Hogan's clothing. This would make her an accessory after the fact to murder. Yet no charges where filed against her. [Miss Ledyit was asked this question by my lawyer, Mr. Gaetz, at the first trial, Question: I see who told you that? Answer: “I can't remember if it was the Crown Attorney or a Detective.” This suggest a miss trial that could have been called!] Also In chief, on page 606 lines 23-31, page 610 lines 16-27, page 611 lines 3-31, page 612 lines 3-14, [Cross examination], page 614 lines 12-31, page 615 lines 24-31 and page 617 lines 18-25, all these pages and lines are suggesting that Lee Ann Ledyit, Darlene Marshall and Barbara Pasqua, could have been charged with being accessories after the fact to murder. No charges were laid!
20.Ms. Joyce McLaughlin , {9 pages of evidence was read in at second trial 1982, volume 3, pages 621-630}Crown witness, her evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
21.Mr. Chris McDonald, {2 pages of evidence was read in at second trial, volume 3, pages 630-632}Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
22.Mr. Ivan Walter McCrieght, {49 pages of evidence, Volume 3, pages 633-682, 39 pages more than my first trial 1979. (In-chf by Mr. Douglas 633, Cr-ex by Mr. Caputo 640, Re-ex by Mr. Douglas 679.){ At the first trial 1979, at pages 786-796, Mr. Was an extremely confused witness, at page 9 lines, 24-28, Mr. McCrieght states he didn't know anyone else at Darlene's place.} Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. After, four cross-examinations by four different Lawyers, there is not a shred of evidence that suggest that Mr. McCrieght knew me, John C. Moore, personally. In his own words, “I don't know the other two guys, that where there.” (Q: Did you know them? A: “No, I just met them that night eh.”) [Volume 4, Page 794 at lines 24 to 28]. But at the second trial 1982, it appeared that Mr. McCreight was coached by either the Crown or Police. At pages 637&638 at the second trial, there is evidence that suggest that Mr. McCreight was coached and confused about this alleged conversation between four people in two rooms from the living room couch. At page vol 3, 646 and lines 20-25, Mr. McCreight was talking about the fight on Friday June 30, 1978 in the evening. On page vol 3, 647 at lines 24-27, Mr. McCreight stated he was confused about the date and times. And at page vol 3, 649 at lines 20-27, Mr. McCreight stated that the bed room door was closed. Even the judge notice that Mr. McCreight was some what confused, on page vol 3, 652 at lines 7-20. So at page 652 vol 3, at lines 15-31, Mr. Justice Walsh, starts his own cross examination of Mr. McCreight for the Crown. Mr. Justice Walsh cross examination of Mr. McCreight continued for about four or six pages off and on. What Justice Walsh did, was against rules of evidence, which suggest that a mistrial should have been called. On page 659 at lines24-25, Mr. McCreight said, “You've got me too confused. I can't remember what's going on.” On page 663 at lines 5-17, Mr. McCreight states that he has a learning disability, which affects his memory. At page 667 at lines 14-31, there evidence that suggest that a mistrial could have been called. On page 676 at lines 20-31, there is more evidence to suggest a mistrial and also evidence to suggest coaching of the witness Mr. McCreight by the Crown and the Police. On page 678 and 679, there is more evidence that suggest coaching of Mr. McCreight, before the 1982 trial. Then on page 680 at lines 2-10, Mr. McCreight states, “I'm not trying to make things up.”
23.Mr. Scott Overland , {A reference was made to Scott Overland one page of evidence, volume 3, page 683} Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
24.Doctor Bendra Rasaiah Pathologist , {20 pages of evidence was read in, 14 pages less than my first trial 1979, volume 3. page 684-704}Professional Crown witness, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. No DNA and No Physical evidence.
25.Mr. Norman Edward Erickson, {11 pages of evidence was read in, 5 less pages than my first trial 1979, volume 3, pages 705-716}Professional Crown witness, he is an Analysis for Forensic Sciences in Toronto, his evidence absolutely doesn't link me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.
26.Officer John Campbell, {4 pages of evidence 3 pages less than my first trial 1979, volume 3, pages 716-720, [At the first trial 1979 at page, 819 lines 25-28, six words]}Crown Police witness, his evidence was of an alleged whispering comment that I allegedly made and directed at Mr. Robert Hogan. The words that were allegedly used by me and Officer John Campbell supposedly over heard were these words, “you fucken snitch, you fucken squealer.” Six words out of his eight pages of evidence. I know for a fact I didn't use such words, because those words where not part of my vocabulary. I never heard such words, “you fucken snitch, you fucken squealer”, until I was imprison, for a murder that I absolutely and unequivocally did not commit or had any part in. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction. This Crown police witnesses's evidence doesn't link me, John C. Moore too, Mr. Lanthier's murder and robbery.
27.Officer George T. Burmasters, {12 pages of evidence 4 more pages than my first trial 1979, volume 3, pages 721-733, [At My first trial at page 827 lines 20-22, one sentence.]}Crown Police witness, his evidence was of an alleged conversation he allegedly overheard through an inch or two inch crack in the door too court room C, Justice Boyd's Court room, between Mr. Stevens and myself. This alleged conversation was what Mr. Stevens, allegedly had said, “There are only four of us that know what happen that night. One is dead, you, me and Hogan.” Nine pages of evidence of an alleged conversation and those two sentences are the ones that stick out at the first trial. This alleged conversation absolutely and unequivocally did not transpire, between Mr. Stevens and myself. This alleged conversation could have happen anywhere, between the court house and city jail. Yet Officer Burmasters, by chance overhears this alleged conversation through a crack in a court room door, which was about an inch or two. There is evidence right across Canada, to suggest that police will lie to get a conviction. This Crown police witnesses's evidence doesn't link me, John C. Moore too, Mr. Lanthier's murder and robbery.

I N S U M M A R Y :
At the second trial there was roughly 1,660 pages of evidence that was presented, on September 20-30, 1982, including 56 exhibits. Even at the second trial there was absolutely no factual evidence that was presented, that linked me, John C. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. There were 26 witnesses called to present their evidence in front of a Judge and Non-Aboriginal jurors and all those witnesses absolutely and unequivocally don't link me, John C. Moore too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery.

So after two trials in front of two Non-Aboriginal Jurors in a Sault Ste. Marie Court house. Three appeals to the Appeal Courts of Ontario and one appeal to The Supreme Court of Canada and 3,455 pages of trial transcripts and 56 exhibits, there still is absolutely and unequivocally no factual evidence that links me, John Caleb. Moore, too Mr. Donald Lanthier's murder and robbery. This still leaves me waiting for justice in Canada.

INACCURATE NOTES:
Officer Gary Burn's inaccurate notes
On page 321 at lines 17-19:
Q: Now, the question says five cells. Did you not notice that when the question was asked?
A: I don't know. I may have made a mistake.

On page 328 at lines 14-21:
Q: And while you're writing it out, you have to concentrate on both what you're writing and what you're listening to?
A: Absolutely.
Q: Did you find that difficult?
A: At some point I did.
Q: Were there points when both me were speaking at the same time?
A: There may have been.

On page 332 at lines 16-27:
Q: In you mind was there ever at a previous stage of confusion as to whether that was Rick or Rod.
A: Yes, there was.
Q: And at that point in time you didn't know whether somebody had said Rick or somebody had said Rod, is that fair?
A: Not that I didn't know who said it, it wasn't quite clear if I had Rick or Rod in my writing.
Q: Well, what do you say now?
A: I'm still not sure.
Q: You're still not sure?
A: If it was Rod or Rick. I believe it was Rod, but it could have been Rick, I'm not sure.

IN SUMMARY
There was speculation that there may have been a prier conversation, but speculation is not factual.

Constable Gary Burns, His evidence became essential and crucial to the Crowns case, after Mr. Robert Hogan was declared HOSTILE OR ADVERSE witness. And after Mr. Rick Nichols openly admitted under oath that he lied and made things up on the witness stand, Officer Burn's evidence became even more essential and crucial to Mr. Norman Douglas, The Crown Attorney.

All other witnesses and their evidence, absolutely did not solidly link me to Mr. Lanthier's murder, that is fact. There was a lengthy debate over the typed version of Officer Burn's notes. His notes were inaccurate and one sided. The typed version of Officer Burns' notes, were prejudicial and one sided and Mr. Justice Walsh, ordered the typed version of his notes not to go into the jury room as an exhibit or aid for the jury. Those inaccuracies were numerous. Officer Burns' notes of the conversation of utterances, that were taken down in the City Police Station, in the holding cells on August 3, 1978. The time was supposedly from 11:45 p.m. to 2:30 a.m., between Mr. Stevens and myself. Officer Burns claimed that the conversation of utterances was two hours and 45 minutes long. The conversation of utterances did not last more than 45 minutes at tops. I fell asleep within 45 minutes of being placed in those holding cells.

Mr. Douglas, the Crown and Officer Burns, claimed that the conversation of utterances were two hours and 45 minutes long. It was impossible because within 45 minutes of being placed in the Police holding cells, I fell asleep. I was very tired, mentally exhausted and extremely stressed out, my brain started to shut down, from being charged with first degree murder and a number of conspiracy charges. Also I was charged with some unrelated charges at the same time. These were the stressors that made me very tired. I did pass out from being overly mentally and emotionally exhausted.

Also within those 45 minutes, I did mention numerous times to Mr. Stevens about my innocence. I also told him, that he knew I was innocent, so do something about it.

There was an echoing reflection coming off the walls in those holding cells at the Police station, when Mr. Stevens and I were talking. There were times when Mr. Stevens and myself spoke at the same time. It would have been impossible for anyone to determine who said what at those times.

On Wednesday, September 22, 1982, with crystal clarity, I recall seeing the Crown Attorney, Mr. Norman Douglas fold up officer Burn's notes and pass them to the clerk. After the Honourable Mr. Justice Walsh told Mr. Douglas that Officer Burn's typed version of his notes were not to go into the jury room as an exhibit. But as soon as the Honourable Justice Walsh bent his head forward to write in his notes. Mr. Norman Douglas the Crown, folded the typed version of Officer Burn's notes and with the written notes handed them to the clerk. The clerk took them and he place them on the exhibit pile.

His evidence was from a Police Officer's point of view. But his evidence did not solidly link me to the murder of Mr. Lanthier. (page: 291-334, vol.II)

Summarizing all the evidence and witnesses, it's very clear to me that there is absolutely no solid factual evidence to back the Crown's theory in R. v. Moore. There was a reasonable doubt. There was lots of speculation on the Crown Attorney's part. There was no aboriginal jury members on the jury panel. The facts are clear, I was not judge by my peers. Evidence present at both trials, in 1979 and 1982, were merely: Speculative, Hear-say, Circumstantial, three Inconsistent statements, by Rick Nichols, Robert Hogan, and Officer Gary Burn's, the key Crown witnesses Mr. Nichol’s inconsistent testimony where he openly admitted that he lied under oath, as he was up on the witness stand. Mr. Hogan who was adverse or hostile witness, who did not acknowledge his prior inconsistent statement. Robert Hogan's unsworn statement, was inaccurate. Honourable Justice Walsh, ruled that Mr. Hogan was adverse or hostile witness. His inaccurate statement was fabricated and only evidence against himself. Mr. Rick Nichol's statement, was inaccurate. He lied numerous times on the witness stand under oath and he openly admitted this. He also open admitted under oath that he was make things up he was going along. Officer Gary Burn’s inaccurate notes both hand written and the typed version of those inaccurate notes.

Officers Campbell and Burmaster's evidence was from a Police Officer's point of view. None of their evidence, solidly linked me to Mr. Lanthier's murder. They were trying to make me look bad in front of the jury, because the Crown’s case fell apart after the ruling on his key and crucial witnesses. Officer's Campbell and Burmasters evidence was exaggerated and it was from a Police Officer's point of view. It was more racism than anything else.

Officer Gary Burn's notes were inaccurate and one sided, and from a Police Officer's point of view. His notes were not permitted into the jury room with other exhibits even as an aid to the jury, but I do recall with crystal clarity seeing Mr. Norman Douglas the Crown Attorney, hand those notes, the written and typed version to the clerk. This is when his Honourable Justice Walsh's head was bent forward writing in his notes. Officer Burn's, notes were very prejudicial, one sided, and distorted, especially the typed version. Officer Burn's distorted notes were crucial, and essential to the Crown's case.

All other Police officers who gave evidence, were from a Police Officer's point of view, and their evidence did not solidly link me to Mr. Lanthier's death. They were trying to make me out to be a Mafioso type person. I am not that type of person. It was more racism than anything.

All other witnesses, and their evidence, did not solidly link me to Mr. Lanthier's death.

On a number of occasions throughout the trial, Mr. Frank Caputo, my lawyer told me, that he could have called a mistrial numerous times. The reason he did not call a mistrial was; because, he was overly confident, that he was going to win my case.

The bottom line is very clear, I absolutely did not kill Mr. Donald Lanthier. There was absolutely no plan to rob or kill Mr. Lanthier that I knew of. I am not responsible for his death. Nor am I responsible for the principal offenders, Mr. Gordon Steven's or Mr. Robert Hogan's irreversible actions. There was absolutely no agreement of any type, speculative or otherwise between, the principal offenders, Mr. Steven, Mr. Hogan, Mr. Nichol or myself. I absolutely did not have any foresight knowledge of events prior to Mr. Lanthier's death. I am very sorry that this man was killed. But I am not responsible for his death, and I can not be held accountable for the principal offenders Mr. Stevens or Mr. Hogan's irreversible actions. No one has the power to read other peoples thoughts.

It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that I was not present during the murder of Mr. Lanthier. The appeal courts judges, the crown, and the judges from both trials all acknowledge this one clear fact, that I was not at the scene of Mr. Lanthier's murder. How can I be guilty of Mr. Lanthier's murder than, when I was not even present at the scene of his murder?

Mr. Norman Douglas, The Crown Attorney, has failed to prove his case against me, beyond a reasonable doubt. He also failed to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, the essential elements which is required in R. v. Moore, MENS REA (“A GUILTY MINE”) AND ACTUS REUS (“A WRONGFUL ACTION”).

Its crystal clear to me, that I did not kill Mr. Lanthier. Especially when I was not even at or even near the scene of the crime. Therefore, I did not kill Mr. Lanthier.

It is also very clear to me that I never received a fair trial. There are some very clear reasons why I didn’t get a fair trial and these reasons are: [1] There was not one aboriginal persons in the jury panel that was selected in R. v. Moore. [2] There was reasonable apprehension that the jury was racially prejudice, because of their Christian beliefs. [3] There was reasonable apprehension that the Crown Attorney was racially prejudice also, because of his Christian beliefs. Note: Christian people viewed all Aboriginal peoples as: SPAWNS OF THE DEVIL, WILD BEAST, WILD ANIMALS, BARBARIC, UNCIVILIZED, SAVAGES, PAGANS, HEATHENS, SINFUL, DECEITFUL, WORTHLESS BUMS, DRUNKARDS, WICKED, RENEGADES, NON BELIEVERS, WITCHES AND DEVIL WORSHIPPERS. The negative spiritual list goes on. There was no solid factual evidence to convict me on anything. All evidence was speculation and conjecture. Yet I am labelled a murderer, and I never killed anyone.

As the “British North American Act,” the "Canadian Bill of Rights", the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" and the “United Nation’s Annexe of Civil and Political Rights,” guarantees.

THE ELEMENTS OF A CRIME.

The key essential elements to convict any Canadian citizen are:

Mens Rea: “A Guilty Mind.”

An intention in common!
An agreement!
Foresight knowledge of weapons!

Actus Reus: “A Wrongful Action.”

I was not at the scene of the murder!
I never actively participated in the crime!
I never had any weapons on my person!

These elements must exist at the same time and at the same time as the offence.

For all true criminal offences, it is necessary to prove two elements existed at the time of the offence: Actus reus, is Latin for “guilty act or deed.” It involves the physical conduct of the accused. For actus reus to exist, an individual must commit a prohibited action. Mens rea, is Latin for “guilty mind.” It focuses on the mental state of the accused and requires proof that the accused intended to commit a criminal wrong. There was absolutely no solid factual evidence to prove that I intended to commit a criminal wrong! None! ABSOLUTELY NONE! These elements must exist at the same time and at the same time as the offence.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms specifies in section 11(d) that a person is , “to be presumed innocent until proven guilty (not guilty before proven innocent) according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.” The onus, or responsibility for proof of actus reus and mens rea, is therefore on the Crown. The Crown must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. This is where Mr. Norman Douglas the Crown Attorney failed! He had no case against me! His evidence was skeletal! IF THERE IS ANY DOUBT IN THE MIND OF THE JUDGE OR JURY THAT THE ACCUSED COMMITTED THE CRIME. THE ACCUSED WILL GET THE BENEFIT OF THAT DOUBT AND BE ACQUITTED.


At the second trial in September 1982, there were 25 witnesses, 10 less than the first trial.
11 of those witnesses there evidence wasn't important enough to be called to the witness stand, so the Crown read in their least important evidence. Those witnesses absolutely don't link me to Mr. Lanthier's murder and robbery.

So this leaves 14 witnesses. Four of those Crown witnesses could have been charged and convicted of being accessories after the fact to murder.
That leaves 10 witnesses. Two of those witnesses admitted under oath, that they were coached by either the Crown or the Police. This suggest a mistrial could have been called.
So this leaves 8 other Crown witnesses. So you take the 6 of those Crown witnesses, who are police and professional witnesses; Detective Sergeant Shanahan, Norman Erickson, the Forensic Analysis, Officer Allan Rains, Detective Eric Overman, Detective Hugh Morrow and Doctor Bendra Rasaiah, the Pathologist. All these six professional witnesses don't link to Mr. Lanthier's murder and robbery. There is no DNA evidence and no physical evidences linking me to Mr.
Lanthier's murder and robbery.
Constable Gary Burns, inaccurate and scratchy notes where subject to a void dire.
The final witness Detective Donald Sadowski.