# data[].attributes.headline
My assessment and reflection on Romeo Phillion's case.

# data[].attributes.subject
My assessment and reflection on Romeo Phillion's case.

# data[].attributes.body
After reviewing the case, I summarized the events chronologically, Identified the factors that caused Romeo to be convicted in the first place, discussed his lack of compensation and reflected the case as a whole.

# data[].attributes.body
A start to finish account of Romeo Phillion's legal battle for freedom. A great account of events and a great read!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Author: Sarah Harland-Logan
Introduction: The Unsolved Murder of Leopold Roy
The story of Romeo's wrongful conviction began on August 9, 1967, when a firefighter named Leopold Roy was stabbed to death by an unknown assailant. His wife, Mildred, described the man to Ottawa Police officers, who then placed Romeo and his identical twin brother, Donald, in a police lineup. However, police learned that Donald had been out of town at the time that the murder was committed, so he was released. On August 13, however, Romeo was back in the police station, having been arrested on an unrelated charge. At this time Mildred observed him and said that, though she was not certain, she thought that Romeo resembled the man who had killed her husband. Since she could not make a positive identification, Romeo was released.[1]

The police did not make any headway in their investigation into Leopold's death for the next four-and-a-half years. During this period, Mildred identified three other men whom she believed resembled her husband's killer. Police eventually released all three of these suspects without laying any charges.[2]
Romeo's False Confession
On January 11, 1972, Romeo again found himself in trouble with the law. This time, he had been arrested for an armed robbery of a taxi driver. Although this matter was completely unrelated to Leopold's unsolved murder, in the end Romeo confessed to the murder, much to the surprise of Detective Huneault, the officer who interviewed him.[3] Romeo first asked Detective Huneault if Neil, Romeo's lover, had told him anything. When Detective Huneault played along and responded that Neil had said "a lot about the things you bragged about to him," Romeo suddenly confessed to murdering "the fireman." [4] He asked Detective Huneault to bring him a coffee so that they could talk about it.[5]

When Detective Huneault returned with the coffee, Romeo kept his side of the bargain. He explained that he had murdered Leopold many years ago, and said that he would make a full confession after being allowed to meet with Neil. The police allowed this meeting, and Romeo signed his confession shortly after.[6] Moreover, Neil informed the police that Romeo had made a similar confession to him four days prior to his arrest.[7] Romeo's reasons for making the false confession are complex and will be explored below. These deeply regrettable decisions would follow him for the rest of his life.
Romeo's Trial
Romeo's trial began on October 16, 1972. The Crown built its case on three key pieces of evidence:

(1) Mildred's identification of Romeo as the man who had killed her husband (notwithstanding the fact that she had also identified four other people as his killer);[8]

(2) Romeo's confession to the crime, which he had given freely;[9] and

(3) Romeo's earlier confession to Neil.[10]

Romeo's defence counsel argued that despite these confessions, his client was innocent. He led evidence from two experts who stated that Romeo suffered from antisocial personality disorder, and that he had a propensity "to lie and to invent stories to make him feel important." The experts believed Romeo's desire to feel important had prompted him to falsely confess to Leopold's murder.[11] Moreover, on the very night of his (false) confession, Romeo had recanted his confession to another police officer. He had explained that he was innocent, but he and Neil were collaborating on a scheme to send the police "on a wild goose chase" and enable them to collect the reward money from Neil's report of his false confession.[12] Romeo has consistently maintained that he is innocent from this recantation until the present time.[13]

Romeo's lawyer, Arthur Cogan, also pointed out that the police had lost many pieces of evidence that should have been presented in the case, including a hair sample taken from Romeo and fingernail scrapings, blood and hair samples taken from Leopold. He asked the jury to "look very carefully at the lack of a proper police investigation in arriving at their verdict."[14]

Despite these troubling features of the evidence, the jury found Romeo guilty on November 7, 1972, and he was sentenced him to life in prison with no parole eligibility for ten years.[15]
Romeo's Unsuccessful Attempts to Appeal his Conviction
Romeo attempted to appeal his conviction to the Ontario Court of Appeal, arguing among other things that due to the many problems with the police investigation, he had been deprived of the presumption of innocence to which all accused persons are entitled. He was unsuccessful and the Court dismissed his appeal on September 3, 1974.[16]

Romeo subsequently sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. On March 22, 1977, this appeal was dismissed as well.[17] After this appeal had failed, Romeo began writing letters of the Minister of Justice, stating that he had been out of town at the time of Leopold's murder and asking that his case be reopened, but no action was taken.[18] Romeo would spend the next 31 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.[19]
A Miscarriage of Justice
More than 20 years later, in 1998, Romeo's case took a surprising turn. His parole officer gave him an envelope containing police reports from his Corrections Canada file. One of these documents was a police investigation report that had been prepared on April 12, 1968 by prepared by the investigating officer, Detective McCombie. This report appeared to provide Romeo with an alibi: it indicated that Detective McCombie had spoken to a Trenton service station operator who confirmed that Romeo had been in Trenton between 12 and 1 p.m. on August 9 - the day of Leopold's murder - "therefore making it impossible for him to return to Ottawa by 2:45 p.m. at the time the murder was committed."[20] This possible alibi had never been raised in Romeo's trial. In fact, his lawyer specifically stated at trial that there was "no issue" with the fact that Romeo had been in Ottawa at the time of Leopold's death.[21]

Finally, Romeo had compelling evidence with which he could get his case reopened. He sent Detective McCombie's report to the Innocence Project at Osgoode Hall Law School. On May 15, 2003, the Innocence Project and AIDWYC submitted a s. 696.1 application for ministerial review to determine whether Romeo's conviction was a miscarriage of justice.[22] Romeo was awarded bail while the Minister of Justice considered the application, bringing an end to his 31 years spent in prison. Although Romeo could have applied for parole much earlier, he had refused to do so because he felt that that applying for parole would be tantamount to admitting that he had killed Leopold. Romeo continued to insist that he was innocent.[23]

On August 2, 2006, the Minister of Justice ordered that the Ontario Court of Appeal reopen Romeo's case.[24] The judges heard evidence to determine why Detective McCombie's 1968 report giving Romeo a verified alibi for the time of the murder had never been disclosed to his lawyer.[25]

In its decision, the majority of the Court concluded that the Crown had not intentionally pursued their case against him knowing that he was innocent. The majority found that there was a great deal of confusion surrounding whether and when the police learned further information that discredited this alibi. Detective McCombie testified that after submitting the April 12, 1968 report, he had retrieved tow records of Romeo's car showing that he could actually have made it back to Ottawa in time to have killed Leopold.[26] However, there was no evidence to confirm that Detective McCombie had in fact made this trip and found evidence that discredited the alibi. Justice Moldaver stated in his decision that "the tow records ... and the occurrence report that Detective McCombie claims to have prepared upon his return from Trenton - if these items in fact existed and were deposited there - had gone missing from the [police] property room by January 1972 when ... [Romeo] was charged" with Leopold's murder.[27] Justice Moldaver did not conclude that Detective McCombie was lying, given his distinguished career and sterling professional reputation.[28] However, he found the complete lack of documentation confirming Detective McCombie's supposed trip to Trenton to be "disturbing," though perhaps not particularly surprising, given the numerous other exhibits that the police had lost and could not locate for Romeo's trial.[29]

Regardless of what exactly happened in the sloppy police investigation, it was perfectly clear that the Crown prosecutor had a copy of the April 1968 report, which was never disclosed to Mr. Cogan, Romeo's lawyer.[30] As a result, Mr. Cogan was unable to use the report - which, as noted by Justice Moldaver, "would have been gold in his hands" - to cross-examine the officers about Romeo's alibi.[31] Therefore if Mr. Cogan had known about the report, Romeo's trial would likely have gone very differently, and Romeo probably would not have spent the following three decades in prison.[32]

The Court of Appeal overturned Romeo's conviction and ordered a new trial.[33] However, the Crown withdrew the murder charge against Romeo on April 29, 2010, since there was no reasonable chance that the new trial would result in his conviction.[34] Coincidentally, April 29 is Romeo's birthday: his name was finally cleared on the day he turned 71. After the charges were withdrawn, he told reporters that he "got an apology from the judge, which was a gift" that he was "not expecting."[35] "I'm 71 years old today," he explained, "but I feel like I'm 21."[36]
The Causes of Romeo's Wrongful Conviction
Numerous factors contributed to Romeo's wrongful conviction. First, Romeo made a false confession that he had murdered Leopold, and though he recanted the confession soon afterward, the damage had already been done. At first it is very difficult to see why Romeo would have chosen to put himself in such danger. However, the Court of Appeal heard testimony given by Dr. Gudjonsson, the world's foremost expert on the psychology of false confessions, which sheds light on this baffling decision.[37] Dr. Gudjonsson explained that voluntary false confessions are actually common in high profile cases such as Leopold's unsolved murder case, and can be motivated by many factors, including:

(1) "a desire for notoriety," fueled by "a pathological need to be infamous or draw attention to himself"(as described by the experts who testified at Romeo's trial);

(2) "an unconscious need to expiate guilt over unrelated transgressions";

(3) "an inability to distinguish fact from fantasy" (indeed, Neil testified that Romeo was someone "who lived in ... a world of fantasy"[38]);

(4) a desire to aid and protect someone else, typically the real criminal" (Romeo's lawyer later suggested that his confession was a "desperate bid" to protect Neil from other charges)[39]; and/or

(5) "revenge - either on someone who the confessor also implicates or on the police whose time is wasted by the false admission."[40] As noted above, Romeo stated during his recantation that he "wanted to get even" with the police "and send them on a wild goose chase."[41]

Dr. Gudjonsson also stated that Romeo did indeed suffer from antisocial personality disorder, as well as borderline personality disorder, and that interaction of these two conditions might have led to his making the false confession.

Perhaps increased knowledge regarding these conditions and/or access to mental health services for Romeo prior to his false confession might therefore have prevented this tragic chain of events from coming about. Unfortunately, our society still struggles to appropriately address the needs of Canadians who suffer from mental illness, both within and outside of the justice system.[42]

Another factor contributing to Romeo's wrongful conviction was the fact that the police investigation was plagued with an incredible degree of disorganization. Police officers frequently lost evidence and failed to keep records of their investigations.[43] These organizational failures intersected with the Crown's failure to disclose the crucial April 1968 report containing Romeo's alibi to his lawyer. Unlike in 1972, Crown prosecutors are now required to disclose every relevant document to the defence, including information that the Crown does not plan to use in court but that could be important to the defence.[44]

Finally, it seems likely that the jury in Romeo's trial put too much emphasis on Mildred's eyewitness testimony. Many people believe that this type of testimony is very credible but in fact, witnesses make confident - and incorrect - eyewitness identifications at an alarmingly high rate, and these problems grow worse as the time interval increases between crime and trial.[45] In fact, of the Innocence Project's first 225 exonerations of wrongly convicted persons in the US, 77% of the convictions had been based on mistaken eyewitness identification.[46]
Wounds that AIDWYC Cannot Heal
Due to his refusal to seek parole and accept responsibility for a crime that he did not commit, Romeo was the longest-serving Canadian inmate to have a murder conviction overturned.[47]

Moreover, Romeo's attempts to secure some compensation for these lost three decades came to a dead end in May 2013, when Superior Court Justice Eva Frank dismissed his $14-million lawsuit against the Attorney General of Ontario and two of the police officers who had investigated his case.[48]

Although it is unfortunate that Romeo chose to make a false confession, it must be remembered that his mental health difficulties almost certainly played a role in this decision. Regardless of the wisdom or ethics of his making the false confession, he certainly did not deserve to spend thirty-one years of his life atoning for it. As Romeo explained to reporters when asked to explain why he had made the false confession, "it was all a bad joke that cost him his life."[49]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Author: Sarah Harland-Logan Introduction: The Unsolved Murder of Leopold Roy The story of Romeo's wrongful conviction began on August 9, 1967, when a firefighter named Leopold Roy was stabbed to death by an unknown assailant. His wife, Mildred, described the man to Ottawa Police officers, who then placed Romeo and his identical twin brother, Donald, in a police lineup.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Romeo Phillion Case - The Canadian Encyclopedia

# data[].attributes.subject
The Romeo Phillion Case - The Canadian Encyclopedia

# data[].attributes.body
A concise article that breaks down Romeo's case into segments and

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Romeo Phillion was the longest-serving prisoner in Canadian history to have a murder conviction overturned.

Romeo Phillion was convicted in 1972 for the murder of an Ottawa firefighter. More than three decades later, he became the longest-serving prisoner in Canadian history to have a murder conviction overturned. When authorities refused to retry him for the crime, Phillion was denied the chance to be found innocent at trial, and to potentially receive compensation for his wrongful imprisonment.

Early Years

Born in Cobalt, Ontario, on 29 April 1939, Phillion was the fourth of nine children. At the age of eight, his parents sent him to a training school for orphans and truants run by a Christian order. He was sexually abused and bullied.

Phillion grew into a shiftless drifter. He learned to live by his wits, lying and committing petty crimes to survive, and consorting with other two-bit criminals. He compiled a criminal record that included convictions for living off the avails of prostitution, theft and assault.

Leopold Roy Murder

On 9 August 1967, Ottawa firefighter Leopold Roy was stabbed to death in an apartment building where he was superintendent. With the help of a description supplied by Roy's wife, Mildred, police assembled a composite sketch of the killer. Days later, Phillion's sometime-girlfriend Gail Brazeau told police that he resembled the composite sketch.

After seeing him in a police lineup, Mildred Roy also stated that there was a resemblance between Phillion and the man who stabbed her husband. In his defence, Phillion proffered an alibi, saying that he had been several hours away from Ottawa that day, in New Liskeard, ON.

Police realized that the lineup evidence from Mildred Roy was insufficient to sustain a criminal charge. They also found Gail Brazeau to be simple-minded and untrustworthy. They released Phillion.

Confession and Trial

For years, investigators remained stymied. Then, on 11 January 1972, Phillion was picked up for questioning in connection with an armed robbery of a taxi driver. Phillion's 18-year-old boyfriend Neil Miller (Phillion was bisexual), was also brought in for questioning.

Phillion surprised the police by suddenly admitting to the Roy murder and agreeing to supply a full confession if he were permitted to see Neil Miller. Hours later, Phillion recanted his confession, but it was too late.

His trial started before a jury on 16 October 1972. The prosecution case revolved around his confession, Mildred Roy's testimony, and a claim by Miller that Phillion had privately confessed to him about the murder.

Phillion's defence lawyer attempted to cast doubt on his client's mental health. He also painted Phillion as someone who would say anything to make himself sound important - including confess to a murder.

The defence also contended that Phillion and Miller had concocted a plan in which Phillion would confess to the Roy murder in hopes of obtaining reward money. According to the plan, Miller was to corroborate the confession.

On 7 November 1972, the jury found Phillion guilty. He was sentenced to life in prison with no parole eligibility for 10 years. Before being led away, Phillion predicted to his trial judge that the sentence "will kill me." His subsequent legal appeals failed.

Imprisonment

Phillion was no less erratic behind bars than he had been on the street. In 1990, he walked away from a minimum-security prison in Kingston, ON, and attempted to rob a bank. Handed more than $2,000 by a teller, he caught a cab and returned to his prison, where he handed the money out to other inmates.

Phillion also attempted suicide several times in prison, once lowering a line with fishhooks down his throat and yanking it back up.

When he became eligible for parole, Phillion steadfastly refused to apply because he would not admit to killing Roy. He knew that without conceding guilt, it was highly unlikely that authorities would grant him parole.

McCombie Report

In 1998, a parole officer left a file in Phillion's cell in Kingston Penitentiary. It included a 1968 report written by Ottawa Police detective John McCombie that ruled out Phillion as a suspect in the Roy murder.

The report detailed how investigators had gone to a service station near Trenton, ON, in 1968 to determine whether Phillion was telling the truth about being on his way back to Ottawa from New Liskeard around the time Roy was murdered. The owner of the Trenton service station confirmed to police that Phillion had been there between noon and 1 p.m. that day. Since Trenton is 237 kilometres away from Ottawa, this made it impossible for Phillion to be the killer.

The police report quoted the service station owner saying that Phillion had left his car radio in lieu of paying for a tank of gas and some simple repairs, "therefore making it impossible for him to return to Ottawa by 2:45 p.m. at the time the murder was committed."

The report had not been disclosed previously to Phillion or his lawyer.

Proving His Innocence

Phillion began trying to raise interest in his case. In interviews with the media, he was adamant that he would one day prove his innocence. "They want you to sit there and feel remorse for something you didn't do," Phillion said in 2001. "I'm going to fight on. I'm innocent and they have no choice. I'll take any test they throw at me because I'm innocent."

Phillion conceded that his long-ago confession was a blot that would be difficult to erase. "I was so naive, so stupid," he said. "I kick my butt for what I did. I ruined my life, for a stupid thing."

Phillion stated that his primary motivation for making the false statement had been to ensure that Miller didn't get into trouble.

"Neil was very sensitive; a drag queen," he said. "Being locked up like that . . . he would die . . . It wasn't a confession. It was a false statement."

The Innocence Project and the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC) adopted Phillion's case in the early 2000s. In 2003, they submitted a joint application to the federal minister of Justice for a review of Phillion's case using a Criminal Code provision that permits cases to be reopened when there is pertinent fresh evidence.

The two organizations had also unearthed new evidence showing that Phillion had made startling errors in his original police statements. For example, Phillion had taken investigators to a bridge where he had purportedly thrown his bloodied clothes into a river. However, upon learning that the location was inaccessible by car, he had changed his mind and taken them to a different bridge.

Court of Appeal Hearing

While the minister of Justice considered his application, Phillion was granted bail. In 2006, the minister decided that the fresh evidence raised serious questions about whether Phillion had been wrongly convicted. He ordered that a special hearing be held by the Ontario Court of Appeal to reconsider Phillion's case.

During the hearing, Detective McCombie testified to a panel of three judges that he had ultimately discovered other evidence that discredited Phillion's alibi. However, the court majority was skeptical of the claim and concluded that Phillion had not received a fair trial. They ordered a retrial.

Instead, on 29 April 2010, the Crown simply withdrew the charge against Phillion. Prosecutors said it would be futile to attempt to try the case again after so much time had passed. The Crown's decision left Phillion in legal limbo. Unconvicted - yet not shown to have been the victim of a miscarriage of justice - he was deprived of the possibility of obtaining financial compensation, outside of a civil lawsuit.

Supreme Court Ruling

A quiet and well-mannered man in his later years, Phillion never gave up his search for justice. He launched a lawsuit against police and the Crown in 2013. However, it was dismissed by an Ontario Superior Court judge.

Shortly before his death in late 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada disagreed with the lower court ruling and upheld Phillion's right to pursue the lawsuit. Nine months later, however, Phillion died of emphysema at the age of 76, leaving his lawsuit in legal limbo.

The Phillion case has come to stand for the unreliability of eyewitness evidence - such as Mildred Roy's police lineup identification. It is also regarded as proof that, as counterintuitive as the notion may seem, individuals do sometimes falsely confess to serious crimes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
association in defence of the wrongly convicted

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Romeo Phillion was the longest-serving prisoner in Canadian history to have a murder conviction overturned. Romeo Phillion was convicted in 1972 for the murder of an Ottawa firefighter. More than three decades later, he became the longest-serving prisoner in Canadian history to have a murder conviction overturned.

# data[].attributes.headline
Romeo Phillion, wrongfully imprisoned for 32 years, dies at 76

# data[].attributes.subject
Romeo Phillion, wrongfully imprisoned for 32 years, dies at 76

# data[].attributes.body
An article posted by The Star reporting Romeo Phillion's death. Romeo died before they were able to settle on compensation for his wrongful conviction, and pain and suffering.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The justice system is not infallible. Romeo Phillion knew that better than most.

Wrongfully convicted of murder in 1972, he would spend almost 32 years in prison - a life robbed by the failure to acknowledge what is not so surprising today: that confessions can be false; that evidence is sometimes withheld; that the courts can get it wrong.

Phillion died Monday morning at the age of 76 in a Mississauga hospital, following a long illness. He was the longest-serving inmate in Canada to have a murder conviction thrown out.

What he wanted most in his years of freedom, he never received: a finding by the court that he was innocent of the 1967 stabbing death of Ottawa firefighter Leopold Roy, an apology for the decades spent cut off from society and compensation from the government.

"I think it was a case that was worth a public inquiry," said lawyer James Lockyer, who represented Phillion in his push to have his conviction quashed.

"When you keep someone in jail for 31 and a half years, that is a quote-unquote mistake that requires more than just a courtroom dealing with it, because the courts don't get to the systemic issues involved."

Romeo Phillion poses for a photo with his sister Simonne Snowdon and brother Armand Phillion after being exonerated from a long standing murder conviction on March 5, 2009. (Tony Bock/Toronto Star)

Phillion was granted bail in 2003, shortly after a request was made for the justice minister to review his case.

By that point, the case had been taken on by the Innocence Project at Osgoode Hall Law School and the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC), of which Lockyer is a co-founder.

"He would want to be remembered as a fighter, as a man who spent many years trying to fight on principle for what was right," said lawyer Alan Young, co-founder of the Innocence Project.

Romeo Phillion in a police mugshot from 1972, when he began serving a sentence for murder.

The government referred Phillion's case to the Ontario Court of Appeal, which ordered a new trial - but not an acquittal - in 2009.

The court found that it was never disclosed to the defence at the first trial that police had verified Phillion's alibi, showing his innocence.

The police report confirming the alibi might never have surfaced, had a parole officer not shown it to Phillion in 1998, according to his biography on the AIDWYC website.

Romeo Phillion at his sister's home in Mississauga in 2003 along with his cat, Tiger, who was his companion for 2 1/2 years in prison. (Tobin Grimshaw/Toronto Star)

The Crown withdrew the murder charge against Phillion on his 71st birthday, April 29, 2010, arguing too much time had passed.

He would continue to fight after the charge was dropped.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court of Canada paved the way for his $14-million lawsuit against the Crown and police.

His civil lawyer, David Robins, said he'll be seeking instructions from Phillion's estate about continuing the lawsuit.

"I didn't do 32 years for nothing," Phillion told the Star when he first launched the lawsuit in 2012. "I lost my freedom. Somebody's got to pay for that."

Phillion was "never well treated by the system," said Lockyer.

He was convicted by a jury largely based on a confession he reportedly made to impress his lover, Neil Miller, and that he recanted almost immediately.

"I was so naïve, so stupid. I kick my butt for what I did," he would tell the Star years later. "I ruined my life, for a stupid thing."

Lockyer said he recalled the confession was because Phillion wanted his "15 minutes of fame."

"He was boasting in the cells to the police about how he had fooled their fellow officers, and was asking to see a newspaper so he could see his face on the front page," Lockyer said.

Phillion's trial lawyer, Arthur Cogan, told the Star that Phillion suffered from mental health issues, and would often tell stories that were difficult to verify.

"He told a number of things that were inconsistent, several places that he was at all at the same time," he said, adding Phillion did not take the stand on his advice. "It was very hard to determine which was correct."

Cogan said one lasting impact Phillion's case had on the criminal justice system is found in a Supreme Court ruling that concluded polygraph evidence could not be submitted to prove innocence.

Cogan had tried to have a lie-detector operator testify that Phillion's polygraph readings were consistent with his claims that he had falsely confessed.

Phillion maintained his innocence in prison, refusing to apply for parole because he believed it would be seen as an admission of guilt.

Lockyer said he believed Phillion's 12 years of freedom were happy ones.

He was a staunch supporter of AIDWYC, appearing in his scooter at many of their events, as well as in court when a wrongfully convicted individual was being released.

"He had friends he never had before and he had a sense of being someone, because people were really interested in meeting him and hearing him speak publicly," said Lockyer.

"It was remarkable how much everyone always liked him."

Phillion is survived by four sisters.

Funeral arrangements have yet to be confirmed.

With files from Star staff and The Canadian Press

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Romeo Phillion, wrongfully imprisoned for 32 years, dies at 76 | The Star

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The justice system is not infallible. Romeo Phillion knew that better than most. Wrongfully convicted of murder in 1972, he would spend almost 32 years in prison - a life robbed by the failure to acknowledge what is not so surprising today: that confessions can be false; that evidence is sometimes withheld; that the courts can get it wrong.

# data[].attributes.headline
A video showing various innocent people who were wrongfully convicted.

# data[].attributes.subject
A video showing various innocent people who were wrongfully convicted.

# data[].attributes.body
If you click the link, you can see that Romeo Phillion allegedly commented on the video shortly before his death.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Guilty until Proven Innocent: Wrongful Convictions in Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
UOIT's Student Law Association presents "Guilty until Proven Innocent: Wrongful Conviction in Canada." Thursday, April. 5th, 2012 ~ 61 Charles St. Oshawa, ON http://www.facebook.com/events/122964034498266/ Check us out on: Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Student-Law-Association/130144393695375 Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/SLawAssociation Website: http://www.wix.com/slaatuoit/info If you have any inquiries or to RSVP email us at studentlawassociation@gmail.com

# data[].attributes.headline
A student made video, narrating Romeo's Journey in detail.

# data[].attributes.subject
A student made video, narrating Romeo's Journey in detail.

# data[].attributes.body
This video, although not professionally done, has lots of interesting information pertaining to Romeo, starting with him first being called in as a potential offender, to his proven alibi and being released on bail in the early 2000's.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Uploaded by christina Pellizzari on 2017-11-28.

# data[].attributes.headline
A slideshow following Romeo's Legal Journey

# data[].attributes.subject
A slideshow following Romeo's Legal Journey

# data[].attributes.body
This slideshow is an interesting one as it shows Romeo before conviction, legal documents that were part of his conviction and images of him as he lived after being released.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Wrongfully Convicted of Murder Romeo Phillion spent 31 years in prison before being fully exhonerated. He sued the Ontario government, the Ottawa police force and two detectives that worked his case for $14 million. However He died before receiving any compensation

# data[].attributes.headline
Romeo appears in a library before an interview.

# data[].attributes.subject
Romeo appears in a library before an interview.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.aidwyc.org/cases/historical/romeo-phillion/

# data[].attributes.headline
An image posted by The Observer of Romeo celebrating his innocence.

# data[].attributes.subject
An image posted by The Observer of Romeo celebrating his innocence.

# data[].attributes.body
theobserver.ca

# data[].attributes.headline
Romeo makes an appearance before heading to court to request $14 million in copensation.

# data[].attributes.subject
Romeo makes an appearance before heading to court to request $14 million in copensation.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/romeo-phillion-case/