# data[].attributes.body
The picture depicts Leighton Hay, aged 19, who was convicted of first degree murder and attempted murder for a crime that he did not commit.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the full story of Leighton Hay's case. Innocence Canada were the ones who fought to help Leighton Hay become a free man.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On Friday, July 5, 2002 Leighton Hay was a 19-year-old attending high-school extension courses. Although it was a Friday evening he decided to stay at home where he lived with his mother and older sister, Lisa. He was oblivious to the tragic events that were about to unfold, events which would change his life forever.

At 12:58 a.m. on July 6, 2002, four men and a woman tried to enter the HHMS Nightclub on Victoria Park Avenue in Scarborough, Ontario without paying the cover charge. An altercation broke out. Roger Moore, one of the organizers of the event taking place that evening, hit one of the men over the head with a bottle. The intruders left but at 1:14 a.m. three men with handguns pushed their way into the club and eventually two of them entered the kitchen where brothers Colin and Roger Moore were standing. Colin Moore was shot eight times and died from his wounds. Roger Moore survived the bullet wound that grazed his forehead.

In the kitchen at the time of the shooting were Colin Moore's wife Jennifer Moore and friend Leisa Maillard. Neither was injured.

Jennifer Moore identified Gary Eunick as one of shooters. He was Lisa Hay's boyfriend and was known to Jennifer Moore and other patrons of the night club, including its owner. He was also identified by several of the eyewitnesses as one of the three men who had been involved in the earlier fight as well as being one of the gunmen. Jennifer Moore did not recognize the second gunman who was dressed in a blue plaid shirt. However, Leisa Maillard said that she kept her eyes on the second shooter whom she said she observed for approximately 16 seconds.

Leisa Maillard and other eyewitnesses told the police that the second shooter had two-inch picky dreadlocks.

The owner of the nightclub had written down the license plate number of the car in which the shooters escaped. The police were able to identify the car as belonging to Lydia Hay, Leighton's mother.

The police immediately put the Hay home under surveillance and at around noon on July 6, 2002 they arrested both Gary Eunick and Leighton. However, the police had a problem. At the time of his arrest, Leighton did not have two-inch picky dreadlocks. When questioned by the police, Leighton told them that his hair had been cropped short for the past 18 months.

Upon searching the Hay home, the police found short hairs wrapped in a newspaper in the garbage can in the bathroom, adjacent to Leighton's bedroom. The police also observed hairs in an electric razor on a table next to Leighton's bed. Leighton advised the police that he had shaved his face two days previously.

However, the police were convinced that Leighton must have returned home after the shooting and shaved his head in order to disguise his appearance. No long hairs were found so the police surmised that Leighton had flushed those hairs down the toilet.

The case against Leighton Hay at trial rested on the eyewitness evidence of Leisa Maillard whom the police had shown a photo line-up which included him. She pointed at his photo saying that he looked more like the second gunman than the other 11 photos, giving an 80% estimate of her own accuracy. Leisa Maillard was shown a second line-up three weeks later and did not select Leighton's photo. At court at the preliminary hearing, she identified Gary Eunick as the second gunman.

At his trial, the Crown told the jury that the residue found in the electric razor and the newspaper was what was left after Leighton cut his dreadlocks and flushed the longer hairs down the toilet.

The jury convicted both Leighton and Gary Eunick of first-degree murder.

On May 12, 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Leighton's appeal. The Court laid particular emphasis on the supposed haircut which "tipped the scales" in support of the jury's verdict.

After Leighton lost his appeal, the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC), now Innocence Canada, adopted his case as one of likely innocence.

Our lawyers decided to seek scientific testing of the hairs found in the Hay home to see whether they were really facial/beard hairs. Mr. Tony Tessarolo, the Director of the Centre of Forensic Sciences (the Centre) agreed to have the Centre conduct a forensic examination of the hairs to determine their bodily origin. The Crown opposed this testing and refused to release the hairs to the Centre for examination. Innocence Canada asked the Supreme Court of Canada for an order that the exhibits be released to the Centre. On November 18, 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada made this order.

The examination was conducted by Centre scientist, Joanne Almer, and an outside expert, retained by the defence. Microscopic examination showed that the hairs were facial hairs, not head hairs. The prosecution theory that Leighton had shaved his head to disguise his appearance was unsustainable. Leighton could not have been the gunman with the two-inch picky dreads.

On April 23, 2013 Innocence Canada counsel, James Lockyer and Philip Campbell, argued Leighton's case in the Supreme Court of Canada.

On November 8, 2013, in a lengthy judgment, the Supreme Court of Canada admitted the new scientific evidence, quashed Leighton's conviction and ordered a new trial on the charge of first degree murder.

In the judgment, Mr. Justice Rothstein said:

" 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 ".

Following the Supreme Court decision, the Crown continued to act as if it intended to proceed with the new trial. This was painstakingly stressful for Leighton and his family.

On November 28, 2014 the Crown finally withdrew the first-degree murder charge against Leighton. For the first time in 12½ years, he was a free man. Leighton walked out into the sunlight and was reunited with his father and sister.

James Lockyer who championed Leighton's case and fought for his freedom alongside Phil Campbell said:

" Leighton has been through a nightmare for all these years. His walk into freedom today will be momentous for him and for us at AIDWYC. His family will be at court and he will need all their support and AIDWYC's support in the months to come.

This was a miscarriage of justice of the highest order. "

Phil Campbell, one of Leighton's dedicated lawyers, said:

" I will never forget how crushed I was on the day Leighton's conviction was upheld after his first appeal; it was the bleakest day of my career. Today is a better, brighter day, Leighton has faced many challenges during his years in penitentiary and more lie ahead. The consequences of his wrongful conviction will linger long after the courts and lawyer close their files. But for today, his freedom and the righting of a wrong are worth celebrating. "

Since his walk into the sunshine Leighton has proven to be a wise young man of few words who takes one day at a time. He has not allowed the 12 years of his life that he lost to dampen his positive outlook or stop him from pursuing his interests or dreams in his time and in his unique way.

Innocence Canada's Director of Client Services, Win Wahrer, describes him as patient, kind and forgiving as well as resolute, loyal with a deep thirst for knowledge:

" Leighton is a person of high integrity, intuitiveness, hardworking and dependable who deserves the opportunity to realize and achieve all his personal and professional goals and in time despite the challenges that lie ahead, I am sure he will. "

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Friday, July 5, 2002 Leighton Hay was a 19-year-old attending high-school extension courses. Although it was a Friday evening he decided to stay at home where he lived with his mother and older sister, Lisa. He was oblivious to the tragic events that were about to unfold, events which would change his life forever.

# data[].attributes.body
This website talks about the many ways that forensic science can be misapplied. It is the second most common factor that leads to wrongful convictions. Some problems that were talked about on the site include: insufficient validation of a method, mistakes and misconduct. In Leighton Hay’s case, the problem was the fact that the investigators did not do a proper job of examining the evidence. It was thanks to Innocence Canada that the evidence was reexamined, which led to Hay being proved innocent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Misapplication of forensic science is the second most common contributing factor to wrongful convictions, found in nearly half (45%) of DNA exoneration cases.

Through the examination of more than 350 exonerations, the Innocence Project has seen the many ways forensic science can be misapplied. We use the term "misapplication of forensic science" to describe several kinds of problems, including:

Unreliable or invalid forensic discipline. Studies have demonstrated that some forensic methods used in criminal investigations cannot consistently produce accurate results. Bite mark comparison in which an identification of a biter is made from a bite mark made on skin is an example of an analysis that is unreliable and inaccurate.

Insufficient validation of a method. Some of the forensic disciplines in use may be capable of consistently producing accurate results, but there has not been sufficient research to establish validity. Accuracy of a method should be established using large, well-designed studies. Without these studies, the results of an analysis cannot be interpreted. Analysis of shoeprints as a basis of identifying the unique source of a print is an example of a method that has not been sufficiently validated.

Misleading testimony.

Sometimes forensic testimony overstates or exaggerates the significance of similarities between evidence from a crime scene and evidence from an individual (a "suspect" or "person of interest"), or oversimplifies the data. Examples include testimony that suggests a collection of features is unique or overstates how rare or unusual it would be to see these features, implying that it is quite likely that the suspect is the source of the evidence, and testimony that doesn't convey all possible conclusions, as can arise with masking in serology testing.

Sometimes forensic testimony understates, downplays, or omits the significance of an analysis that establishes that an individual should be excluded as a possible suspect. An example is testimony that an analysis is "inconclusive" when in fact, the analysis excluded the suspect.

Sometimes forensic testimony fails to include information on the limitations of the methods used in the analysis, such as the method's error rates and situations in which the method has, and has not, been shown to be valid.

Mistakes. Like everyone, forensic practitioners can make mistakes, including mixing up samples or contaminating specimens. These can occur in any type of science or laboratory testing, even in well-developed and well-validated fields.

Misconduct. In some cases, forensic analysts have fabricated results, hidden exculpatory evidence, or reported results when testing had not been conducted.

The first major scientific institution to investigate this problem across the board was the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in its report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, released in 2009. This report noted that "imprecise or exaggerated expert testimony has sometimes contributed to the admission of erroneous or misleading evidence." It also found that some forensic techniques, particularly those that deal with comparing patterns or features (such as tire tread impressions, bite marks, fiber, or hair), have not been subjected to sufficient scientific evaluation, and noted that the scientific basis for arson investigations should be strengthened.

The same concerns were reiterated and expanded upon in the 2016 report, Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods, by the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). This report examined the research underlying specific forensic feature comparison disciplines, evaluated their accuracy and reliability, and made recommendations to various federal agencies to strengthen these disciplines. Among the recommendations was the need for better resources to support judicial training given the changing landscape in the evaluation of forensic evidence and state of validation of various forensic techniques.

Reforms and Solutions

The serious problems identified in forensic science and its practice in the United States can only be addressed by a commitment to reform at multiple levels. The Innocence Project is working at the national level to support efforts to improve forensic science disciplines through research and standards setting, including:

Ensuring that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a preeminent, independent science agency with measurement expertise, conducts scientific evaluations of the validity of the forensic disciplines.

Increasing funding for research at science based agencies and institutions, in accordance with a well developed strategic plan, to establish or strengthen the fundamental science underlying forensic science disciplines.

Developing rigorous national standards, recommendations for documentation of forensic sciences, and guidelines for reports and testimony for those forensic disciplines that have been shown to be based on robust and reliable science.

Supporting judicial training and other efforts to ensure that future decisions in admissibility consider the validity of a forensic test in general, and the validity of the test as applied in the specific case at hand.

The National Commission on Forensic Science (NCFS) is advising the nation on this path forward, and has provided recommendations to the attorney general and the director of NIST on several important topics, including a uniform code of professional responsibility, requirements for report contents, discontinuing the use of the phrase "reasonable degree of scientific certainty", and t he necessity of independent scientific evaluation of the validity of forensic science disciplines.

To improve the quality of forensic science practices in laboratories, the Innocence Project supports efforts to promote error identification and prevention, improve transparency of information, and ensure just outcomes, including:

Adopting of procedures that reduce the influence of "cognitive biases" on an analysis, such as preventing access to extraneous and potentially biasing information.

Continuation of federal funding for the Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Program to support state and local forensic science service providers and to ensure independent external investigations when allegations of negligence or misconduct are made.

Retrospective review of cases when systemic misapplication of forensic science is identified. Examples include the joint microscopic hair comparison review undertaken by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, and the Innocence Project, and reviews conducted by the Texas Forensic Science Commission in response to complaints filed in the state.

Establishment of a duty-to-correct mistakes and a duty-to-notify affected defendants when errors or significant breaches of scientific principles or ethics are identified.

Lastly, as a matter of fairness and justice, the Innocence Project supports judicial examination (post-conviction review) in cases in which unsound science may have contributed to a conviction. Statutes addressing this issue have recently been passed by Texas and California.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Through the examination of more than 350 exonerations, the Innocence Project has seen the many ways forensic science can be misapplied. We use the term "misapplication of forensic science" to describe several kinds of problems, including: Unreliable or invalid forensic discipline. Studies have demonstrated that some forensic methods used in criminal investigations cannot consistently produce accurate results.

# data[].attributes.headline
Human Factors in Wrongful Convictions: Tunnel Vision

# data[].attributes.subject
Human Factors in Wrongful Convictions: Tunnel Vision

# data[].attributes.body
Dr. Jim Trainum explains how tunnel vision can be harmful. Tunnel vision is when you come so focused in on a suspect or a theory that you start to ignore everything else that that can provide some sort of alternative explanation or suspect. In this case, the police were convinced that Hay shaved his hair after the shooting and flushed it down the toilet since there was no evidence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Human Factors in Wrongful Convictions: Tunnel Vision

# data[].attributes.body
An image of James Lockery (Hay’s Lawyer) and Lascelle’s Hay (Hay’s father). On November 8, 2013 the Supreme Court of Canada ordered a new trial for Lescelle’s son who was convicted in 2002.

# data[].attributes.body
Leighton Hay and his father Lasalle walking from the Superior Court on the day he got released.

# data[].attributes.body
Leighton Hay’s lawyer talks to the press about the case. He believes that Hay was a minority who was "vulnerable“ when the police rushed to judgement that led him to prison, and that he was an easy victim to the justice system. He believes that Hay remains innocent and the evidence was not investigated properly. "This was a miscarriage of justice of the highest order.“ -Lockyer

# data[].attributes.headline
Questions and Answers on Leighton Hay's Case

# data[].attributes.subject
Questions and Answers on Leighton Hay's Case

# data[].attributes.headline
Man freed a decade after wrongful murder conviction

# data[].attributes.subject
Man freed a decade after wrongful murder conviction

# data[].attributes.body
An Article by: Colin Perkel, The Canadian Press

A quick summary of the case. The article talks about Hay’s mental illness and how he spent most of his incarceration in the psychiatric wing. Leighton Hay did not speak as he left the court. His supporters did most of the talking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
TORONTO - A man wrongfully convicted of first-degree murder more than a decade ago took his first anxious steps as a free man on Friday after the Crown withdrew the charge against him.

The decision came a year after the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously decided Leighton Hay should get a new trial based on new hair evidence.

As Hay and family members looked on, Superior Court Justice John McMahon apologized that it took so long for the system to get it right.

Hay, who has a mental illness and spent most of his incarceration in the psychiatric wings of two penitentiaries, did not speak as he left court but his supporters did.

"He's out, he's free," an excited Win Wahrer of the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted said minutes after the brief hearing. "He just wants to go home."

In an interview, lawyer James Lockyer said he wasn't sure his client was able to process the implications of what had just occurred.

"Leighton has been through a nightmare for all these years," Lockyer said. "This was a miscarriage of justice of the highest order."

As a teen with mental-health problems and a member of a visible minority, the lawyer said, Hay was "vulnerable" and police rushed to judgment.

"He was another black guy," Lockyer said.

Hay was arrested after two men burst into a fundraiser at a Toronto nightclub in July 2002 and gunned down a respected community figure, Colin Moore, over a disputed cover charge.

The identity of one of the shooters, Gary Eunick, was never in doubt and he was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

The Crown alleged Hay, then 19, was Eunick's dreadlocked accomplice. The only problem was Hay's hair was almost completely shorn when police arrested him.

At his trial in 2004, prosecutors argued Hay had rushed home and shaved his scalp to get rid of his dreadlocks after the shooting.

Key evidence in support of the prosecution theory was hair found in a newspaper in his bathroom garbage and in the electric razor on his nightstand.

The one witness who fingered Hay had pointed to his image in a photo line-up, saying he looked more like the second gunman than the other 11. She was shown a second line-up three weeks later and did not choose Hay, who always denied any part in the killing.

Nevertheless, the jury convicted him of first-degree murder.

The association for the wrongly convicted became involved after Ontario's top court rejected his appeal.

At the association's request, forensic experts determined the hair used to convict Hay did not come from his scalp but from his face. The finding undercut the Crown's contention he had cut off his dreads to alter his appearance.

Last November, the Supreme Court of Canada heard the new hair evidence. The court concluded the information could have made a crucial difference at Hay's trial and quashed his conviction.

The Crown announced Friday it would not proceed against him.

Hay's father said he appreciated the judge's apology and always believed justice would ultimately be done.

"He lose 12 years," Lascelles Hay said. "I hope a lot of good things for him."

Hay's mental health declined in custody, but Lockyer said he was "guardedly optimistic" Hay would manage as a free man living with family.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Man freed a decade after wrongful murder conviction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TORONTO - A man wrongfully convicted of first-degree murder more than a decade ago took his first anxious steps as a free man on Friday after the Crown withdrew the charge against him. The decision came a year after the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously decided Leighton Hay should get a new trial based on new hair evidence.

# data[].attributes.body
Hay's father believes that Justice has been served for his son. In the video he thanks everyone who had a part in proving his sons's innocence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CTV News Channel: Leighton Hay's dad speaks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leighton Hay's dad speaks to the media outside a Toronto courtroom after his son was released from jails after 12 years.