What You Really Need to Know ...

... About Wayne Perkin's Conviction
Home
On this website you will read actual legal documents to back up a theory of an innocent mans conviction.  It is interesting to note that as of today there is a recorded 160 individuals that have been wrongfully convicted and more are coming forward each day.  Their cases have been over turned because of new evidence and technology, for example DNA tests, that now prove their innocence.  As well, most of these cases had jailhouse testimony, the same as this case.  In Mr.Perkin's case one would have to ask why would the R.C.M.P. destroy the very evidence that would have either proven his guilt or exhonorated him?  Why did they not also put the only two pieces of DNA into a data bank for future comparison, since this case did have an unsafe conviction with lurking doubt?  Over the years there have been many convicted persons released from their life sentences by re-testing of DNA that was held for many years.  One such case would be Mr. David Milgaard who was convicted of murder and spent more than 22 years in prison.  On appeal the DNA was still available to be tested at that time and in turn proved his innocence.  Mr. Wayne Perkin requested the DNA evidence through Project Innocence in October of 1998, only to receive a response stating they were unable to disclose the appropriate information due to the Privacy Act.  However, AIDWYC was able to receive a response regarding the DNA evidence in September of 2005 stating that the DNA evidence had been destroyed in January of 1998.  Mr.Perkin's conviction was in May 1994 and by January 1998, less than 4 years later, the DNA evidence had been conveniently disposed of.  This is only one of many errors in this conviction, which you will read about on this website.
Mr. Wayne Perkin is an individual with a long criminal record dating back as far as 1967.  This is a shameful past.  At the young age of nine Wayne Perkin was placed in a residential training school for boys, in Ontario.  During his 5 years at this school the Christian Brothers sexually and emotionally abused him. Wayne was a kid from the wrong side of the tracks that did what he did just to fit in, and to survive life the only way he knew how.  As Wayne grew older he tried to bury his past with drugs and failed relationships, which in turn lead to his criminal activities.  It wasn’t until this conviction that he realized how easy it was to be wrongly accused.  Wayne’s thoughts on this conviction are, “ If only I had not been the tough guy and cooperated with the police maybe things would have been different.”   Mr. Perkin is trying very hard to be a better person.  He is a loving father and husband to a family that is paying a price for his terrible past.  They are proud of who he is today and together have been trying to prove his innocence since the conviction.  There are a number of web sites that tell misleading information about Wayne, however this web site will hopefully clarify the untruths about Mr. Perkin.  This website is the voice to all that will listen, about a man who faced injustice at the hands of the Canadian Judicial system.

The following is a list of both procedural law mistakes and evidence mistakes 

that led to a wrongful conviction for second degree murder.                               

1. Jurisdiction – The judge should have recused himself from hearing the case he declared a mistrial. This was not explained fully to the client by the lawyer, the client only knew that if he signed the waver, his case would be heard soon instead of a possible 2-year wait for another trial.

2.Testimony – by Federal Prosecutor for the department of Justice Ms. Anne Dubberly testified that this witnesses creditability is questionable at best due to the fact that, that Mr. Goodwin (one of the jailhouse informant) committed perjury at the Letourneau and Tremblay trial, (also a murder trial). Ms. Dubberly was accepted as a reliable and credible witness. Where the trial judge refused to allow reports to be submitted as exhibits. Both psychiatric and psychological, that would further dispel Goodwin as a reliable witness.

3.DNA evidence – The Innocence Project in 1998 contacted the R.C.M.P. requesting that they be allowed to DNA test items 45(a) and 45(b) (human hairs believed to be the perpetrators). They were told they could not release it without the third party giving consent (the third party being the murder victim). Thereby denying the accused of proving his innocence unequivocally. (refer to AIDWYC documentation)

4. DNA evidence (2) – Sept 2005 AIDWYC (Association in Defense of the Wrongly Convicted), wrote the Ministry of the Attorney General, once again asking to DNA test items 45(a) and 45(b). Only to be told that these two items “and only these two items” have been destroyed. EVEN THOUGH in the R.C.M.P.’s files, it had notation not to destroy these items as they wanted to conduct DNA testing in the future. Yet when AIDWYC and The Innocence Project requested them, they were destroyed. (refer to AIDWYC documentation)

5. Informant testimony – Numerous inconsistencies in both inmate informants and outright discrepancies, along with the testimony of the above-mentioned Crown prosecutor. And the judges disregard to accept that there was an overwhelming amount of evidence, showing that the informant’s testimony was unreliable and yet he allowed it.

6. Failure to investigate other more viable suspects with motives – It must be noted that it was stated that there was no motive or evidence to link Wayne Perkin to this murder, yet the police were aware of not one but three other possible suspects, all with motive. The police dismissed these suspects, once they had set their sights on Mr. Perkin (refer to the Peck Memorandum)

7. Recant of testimony – Robin Perkin clarified her testimony in a recantation, stating that at no time did the accused admit to her that he committed the murder. (refer to written recantation).