The Ontario Court of Appeal has overturned the conviction and ordered a new trial for a man who spent 23 years in prison for killing a 10-year-old girl in 1989, but it appears unlikely that trial will ever take place.
It's a complex case that includes a recanted confession, as well as charges of police conspiracy and mishandling of evidence, which the appeals court reviewed. after two former justice ministers said The “miscarriage of justice” likely occurred during the original trial of 62-year-old Timothy Rees more than 30 years ago.
Although the decision of the appeal court which was released on Thursdaynotes several problems with the investigation and subsequent case – it does not provide any concrete answers about who strangled 10-year-old Darla Thurrott in her Etobicoke bedroom in 1989.
Decades after Thurrott's death, Rees continues to maintain his innocence.
“I didn't kill Darla. I'm innocent and this has nothing to do with me,” Reece told reporters at the office of James Lockyer, a lawyer with the non-profit legal organization Innocence Canada, which represented him in the latest trial.
“Since 1989, I've been called a killer, but I'm not,” he said, fighting back tears.
The decision said Thurrott went to bed on March 16 that year and was found dead the next morning, with an autopsy report showing she had been strangled.
On the night of the murder, not a single intruder entered the house.
At the time of the murder, Darla was living in the house with her mother Darlene Thurrott (who herself was later killed in 1997), along with her younger brother, her mother's partner Bill Wilson, her mother's friend Jim Venditti, and homeowner James Reimer, who had “physical and mental disabilities” including a limp and impaired use of one arm, according to court documents.
Thurrott and Wilson paid minimum rent to live in the house, which was left to Ramer after his mother died in 1982, in exchange for helping him with daily chores such as keeping clean and preparing meals.
Reece's defense team argues that Reimer is responsible for Darla's death.
Reece was a friend of Thurrott and Wilson and also remained at home on the night of the murder. That evening, Thurrott, Wilson, Venditti and Rees all drank and partied together, with Thurrott and Wilson snorting cocaine “repeatedly” in a second-floor bathroom, according to the decision.
Darla went upstairs to bed at about 9pm and Rhys lay down with a pillow and blanket on the floor of the adjoining children's room at about 10.30pm. Reimer, meanwhile, returned home from his shift at Taco Bell and subsequent church choir practice around 11 p.m., and then went to bed.
Around 10am the next day, Thurrott became concerned that her daughter was sleeping too late, which is when she discovered her lifeless body.
No evidence of forced entry into the house was ever found, leaving police with a group of five suspects who all slept there that night.
Reece, who was 25 at the time, was later charged and convicted of second-degree murder.
Defense suggests landlord was the real killer
Court documents show detectives conducted several interviews with Reece before he eventually admitted to choking Darla. He later retracted this confession, saying he only gave it because he was in a vulnerable state and was being bullied by officers.
Central to Reece's successful claim in court is the fact that Toronto police had, but never released, an audio recording of Reimer's conversation with an officer immediately after the murder.
In this conversation, Reimer denied killing Darla, but made several statements suggesting prior sexual contact with her. He also suggested that he met her on the night of her death, but later denied this.
Reece's lawyers argue that the tape, along with other evidence, points to Raymer as the real killer, although the court's ruling is less clear.
“The subject of the recording, Mr. Reimer, is an individual with intellectual disabilities,” the decision states. “The tape is rife with inconsistencies regarding Mr. Reimer's contact with Darla that night. And much of the tape focuses on possible sexual touching in a case where the murder had no sexual element.”
However, the court ruled that the recording “should have been disclosed,” also noting that it was improperly conducted by a Marine constable who was assigned to the Toronto police homicide unit for the winter months. The decision, the ruling noted, is “impossible to believe” for “anyone practicing criminal law for any period of time.”
Reimer, who was Crown's witness at the original trial, died back in 1999.
Crown Mother on plans for new trial
While Thursday's decision calls for a new trial, it also notes that “the Crown does not intend to clean up the case.
“To the contrary, it appears that the Crown does not intend to ever commence a new trial,” the ruling said.
Asked about the Crown's plans for the case, a spokesman for the Ministry of the Attorney General said they were “unable to provide further information” as the case was before the court.
Speaking to reporters, Lockyer said it was “fair to say” there was “essentially no likelihood of the Crown pursuing a new trial”.
He said he expected the Crown would likely “resolve the case in a different way,” most likely through a recall.
“I find it hard to believe that they would try to start a new trial in light of what is now known,” Lockyer said.
