# data[].attributes.body
One of the most common causes for wrongful convictions is eyewitness identification error. And that was the case for Leighton Hay. Although enough proof was given to show that Hay was not the murderer, a witness was convinced he was the killer because of appearance. She said he fit the description of what she saw the night of the murder at the night club for the second shooter. Hay appealed his conviction because it was solely based on the eyewitness identification.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the aftermath of the shooting, the nightclub's owner observed Eunick fleeing the premises in a green Honda. He wrote down the licence plate, which enabled police to retrieve the vehicle's registration: the Honda belonged to Leighton Hay's mother. 19-year-old Leighton and his sister, who was Eunick's girlfriend, lived at home with their mother. Police commenced surveillance at the Hay residence and found the green Honda parked in the driveway. Meanwhile, other officers showed photo line-ups to a number of eyewitnesses at the police station.

It quickly became apparent that Eunick was one of the shooters. Several witnesses identified him as the man with the semi-automatic handgun. Police went on to retrieve an "overwhelming" amount of physical evidence connecting Eunick to the crime, notably including a "distinctive orange vest" found with his "blood and gunshot granules on it" that witnesses recalled him wearing at the nightclub.

On May 29, 2004, after a six-week trial, the jury found both Hay and Eunick guilty on all charges. Each man was sentenced to life imprisonment with no possibility of parole for 25 years.

With the assistance of counsel from wrongful

Hay's counsel applied to the Supreme Court for an order that the hairs be released for forensic testing.While awaiting the court's decision, Hay's trial lawyer told reporters that "I have all along believed and still believe that Leighton Hay is totally innocent of these charges. . . . To me, it is critical that when science develops, we can get a closer look at what the Crown relied on." In November 2010, the Supreme Court granted Hay's request, finding that it was in the interests of justice for the hairs to be forensically tested, and ordered the Crown to provide them to the Centre of Forensic Sciences.

The Supreme Court granted Hay's application for leave to appeal in July 2012. Hay's counsel proffered fresh evidence from two forensic experts, who determined that the hair clippings were predominantly to exclusively "comprised of facial hairs" rather than scalp hairs. In other words, the clippings had come from Hay's beard, discrediting the Crown's theory that he had shaved his head after the shooting. The Crown also obtained opinions from two forensic experts, who agreed that "there was, as a scientific matter, no evidence to support the proposition that the hair clippings represented a head shave."

In November 2013, the Supreme Court quashed Hay's conviction and ordered a new trial. One year later, on November 28, 2014, the Crown withdrew the charges against Hay rather than prosecute him a second time.Hay, who has schizophrenia, had spent most of his 12 ½ years in prison on the psychiatric wing of two different institutions. His mental health greatly deteriorated during his incarceration.

The presiding judge, Justice John McMahon, addressed Hay after the Crown withdrew the charges: "Nothing I can say will bring back the 12 years that Mr. Hay has been in custody. . . . I apologize for the fact that it has taken this long for the justice system to get it right."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hay was wrongfully convicted of first degree and attempted murder after an eyewitness tentatively identified him from a simultaneous, non-blinded photo line-up.

# data[].attributes.body
Tunnel Vision was present in the arrest of the Leighton Hay. The police had an eyewitness who was 80% sure who she saw was him. Because of that, the police didn't interview anyone else. They decided it was him who was the second shooter and didn't think twice about it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It took 12 years for the justice system to believe in Leighton Hay's innocence, and because of that, the Superior Court of Justice apologized to him on Friday, saying it took too long to get things right.

Mr. Hay became a free man after the Crown ended its prosecution of him for the shooting death of Colin Moore on July 6, 2002. Justice John McMahon said Mr. Hay was free to go and deserving of an apology. The judge acknowledged how slowly and wrongly the legal system had handled Mr. Hay's conviction for first-degree murder.

"You don't get [an apology] very often," said James Lockyer, Mr. Hay's lawyer and the founding director of the Association in Defence of the Wrongfully Convicted (AIDWYC). "It was important to all of us because this man was done wrong, terribly wrong."

Mr. Hay showed no emotion when told he could go home. He hugged his sister, Lisa, went to his parents, Lascelles and Lydia, then walked out of the courtroom. He did not speak to the media outside the court house, either.

Mr. Hay has schizophrenia, a condition his family and lawyers say worsened while he was in prison.

Mr. Hay was charged with murder in a deadly shooting at a charity event in a Toronto nightclub. Multiple witnesses told police that two men entered the club and got into a fight with organizers Colin and Roger Moore. One of the attackers was identified as Gary Eunick, a club regular who flew into a rage when told he had to pay a $10 cover charge. Mr. Eunick left the club only to return minutes later with a 9 mm handgun and a second shooter.

Mr. Eunick opened fire, killed Colin Moore and wounded his brother. The second shooter used a long-barrelled revolver. He had dreadlocks, and a witness later said she was 80-per-cent sure it was Mr. Hay.

Mr. Eunick lived in the same house as Mr. Hay, and a police search found a long-barrelled revolver, a T-shirt with gunshot residue on it and other clothes that witnesses at the club had described. Investigators also discovered a newspaper with hair clippings on it.

Mr. Hay maintained that he was not at the club that night. The Crown contended that Mr. Hay returned home after the shooting and shaved his head to rid himself of the telltale dreadlocks. The hair evidence helped send Mr. Hay to the Kingston Penitentiary for life in May, 2004. Mr. Eunick was also sentenced to life. (Mr. Hay was later moved to the Millhaven Institute's mental health facility.)

Mr. Lockyer, along with fellow lawyers Philip Campbell and Joanne McLean, appealed Mr. Hay's case all the way to the Supreme Court. Mr. Lockyer presented fresh evidence from two forensic experts who said the clippings found on the newspaper, although they came from Mr. Hay, were mostly facial hair, not hair from the head.

The Supreme Court voted unanimously in favour of a retrial for Mr. Hay. One judge, Marshall Rothstein, wrote: "Given the significance of the haircut to the Crown's case, Mr. Hay's fresh evidence ... indicating that the hair clippings did not come from a scalp shave could reasonably be expected to have affected the result."

The Crown said it is not in the public interest to go forward with the second trial.

Now that Mr. Hay has been freed, there is another matter to take care of - compensation for his time in prison. When asked about that, Mr. Lockyer told the media: "If anyone ever deserves compensation it is Leighton Hay. He sorely needs it and deserves it. ...We're going to do our damnedest to make sure that happens."

It was an eventful week for AIDWYC. On Monday, Glen Assoun was granted bail after spending 17 years in jail for a murder he says he did not commit. On Tuesday, Minister of Justice Peter MacKay referred Frank Ostrowski's first-degree murder conviction to the Manitoba Court of Appeal. Mr. Ostrowski, another client of Mr. Lockyer, served 23 years in prison adamantly denying he had anything to do with the 1986 drug-related murder of Robert Neiman.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wrongfully convicted of murder, Leighton Hay free after 12 years

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It took 12 years for the justice system to believe in Leighton Hay's innocence, and because of that, the Superior Court of Justice apologized to him on Friday, saying it took too long to get things right. Mr. Hay became a free man after the Crown ended its prosecution of him for the shooting death of Colin Moore on July 6, 2002.

# data[].attributes.body
When police found cut hair in Leighton Hay's house, they automatically figured it was cut hair from him to try to change his appearance so he wouldn't look like the described suspect. This is what ended up putting him in jail.

However later, when his lawyers were looking for more evidence to prove his innocence, they tested the hair that was found in the house and it was proven to be beard hair and not scalp hair. This was help able to prove his innocence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Leighton Hay, a Toronto-area man who has spent 12 years in prison for a murder he says he did not commit, has been released from custody after Crown prosecutors decided to withdraw murder charges against him.

One year after the Supreme Court of Canada ordered a new trial for Hay because of fresh forensic evidence, the Crown announced Friday it had dropped charges of first-degree murder and attempted murder against Hay.

Justice John McMahon apologized as Hay was released.

"Nothing I can say will bring back 12 years. I apologize for the fact that it has taken this long for the justice system to get it right. I hope you have a long and fulfilling life," McMahon said to Hay, who then left the courthouse with his family without speaking to reporters.

Hay, now 31, was handed a life sentence in 2004, after being convicted of the murder of Colin Moore, 51, a prominent member of the Toronto Guyanese community.

Moore was shot and killed in July 2002, at a Toronto nightclub where he was hosting a fundraiser.

The Crown alleged at trial that Hay had acted as an accomplice to Gary Eunick. Eunick shot Moore eight times after he and his brother, Roger, refused to pay a cover charge to enter the nightclub and then sought shelter in its kitchen.

While Eunick's identity was never in doubt, Hay was convicted in part through hair samples.

The Crown argued Hay had gone home and shaved his head to prevent investigators from identifying him. They pointed to hair found in a newspaper in his bathroom garbage, as well as in a electric razor on his nightstand.

But Hay's lawyers conducted their own tests, and obtained the opinion of experts who said the samples were facial hair, not hair from the scalp.

Last year, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered a new trial for Hay after reviewing the fresh evidence concerning the hair.

Hay was also convicted based on the testimony of one witness whose reliability was later called into question.

Hay's lawyer, James Lockyer of the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted, noted that the justice system is now realizing eyewitness testimony can be notoriously unreliable.

"This is a case of how mistaken eyewitness identification can lead to miscarriages of justice," Lockyer told reporters outside the court Friday.

"There's been a lot of those in Canada and other jurisdictions, and I just wish the court would better recognize the dangers that exist in eyewitness identification."

Hay, who has schizophrenia, spent most of his incarceration in the psychiatric wings of two Canadian penitentiaries.

His father told reporters that he always knew this day would come, and said he was grateful to his son's lawyers, the Supreme Court and Justice McMahon.

"The judge apologized for all the mistakes that they made and that was good. I'm happy," he said.

With files from The Canadian Press

view larger image

Leighton Hay walks out of a Toronto court, Friday, Nov. 28, 2014.

A lawyer for Leighton Hay speaks to the press outside a Toronto courtroom on Friday, Nov. 28, 2014

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CTV News is your source for breaking news, live updates, analysis, and videos from across Canada.

# data[].attributes.body
Leighton Hay and his father. His father said when Hay got released, that he knew this day would always come and he is so grateful for his lawyers, the Supreme Court, and Justice McMahon.

# data[].attributes.body
An image of the Kingston penitentiary, where Leighton Hay was kept for 12 and 1/2 years while he was wrongfully convicted of murder.

# data[].attributes.body
James Lockyer is the founding director of Innocence Canada and was involved in the case of Leighton Hay

# data[].attributes.body
The judge apologizes for the wrongful conviction of Leighton Hay, which is rare. Although an apology doesn't change anything, it is a start. Hay's lawyers will continue to demand compensation for Leighton.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wrongfully convicted Leighton Hay is now free

# data[].attributes.body
James Lockyer, Leighton's lawyer, speaks about Leighton getting out and how happy he is. He speaks about the challenges they had to go through, like the Crown dismissing the idea of forensic testing the hair that was found and having to get an order with the Supreme Court of Canada to get this approved.

# data[].attributes.body
Court Case at the Supreme Court of Canada where Leighton Hay's lawyer presents new evidence of the hair that was thought to be cut dreads from Leighton, but was further proved to be facial hair.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leighton Hay v. Her Majesty the Queen (April 23, 2013) Case # 33536 Collin Moore was murdered and Roger Moore was wounded when two gunmen opened fire on them in a Toronto nightclub. The appellant was accused as one of the shooters based on an eyewitness' identification of him and circumstantial evidence.