|
 January 25, 2005: The Federal government
released the
first national examination of the reasons for so many wrongful
convictions in Canada. This should be required reading for every prosecutor,
cop and criminal defence lawyer in the country. News
reports Lamer Inquiry | Jerome Kennedy
Jody Druken
Crown reviewing verdict
4/27/99
BY HOLLY LAKE Special to The Telegram
The Department of Justice has
not decided if it will appeal the acquittal of Jody Druken on
a charge of first-degree murder.
"We have 30 days to decide
whether or not to file an appeal," said David Wells, director
of communications for the department.
Until then, the Crown Attorney
will be meeting with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary to review
the case and see if there are grounds for an appeal.
Druken, 30, was cleared Sunday
of a first-degree murder charge, and the lesser and included
offence of second-degree murder, after a Newfoundland Supreme
Court jury deliberated over nearly four days.
He had been charged in connection
with the death of his brother, Derek Druken, 33, who was shot
twice in a downtown parking lot in broad daylight in 1996.
Having initially confessed
to the crime, Jody Druken had been in custody since the death
on Nov. 20, 1996, despite later withdrawing his confession.
"Only time will tell where
we go from here," said Supt. Robert Shannahan, officer in
charge of the Criminal Investigation Division and responsible
for investigating the Druken case.
In reviewing it so far, Shannahan
said he believed the investigators and the Crown did a good job.
However, the probe is continuing.
"Certainly, as a result
of the verdict, the investigation remains open," said Shannahan.
"We will continue to go in whatever direction we feel is
necessary."
He refused to comment on possible
suspects.
Responding to allegations by
family members that the police have tunnel vision when it comes
to the Drukens, Shannahan said decisions or investigations would
never be based on a family name, be it good or bad. He said everybody
is treated equally.
"I can assure the Druken
family, and anyone else for that matter, that we deal with facts
and we deal with evidence. We don't investigate people based
on their previous history."
Jurors hear tapes again
4/24/99
By BONNIE BELEC The Telegram
After two full days of deliberations
and a 20-minute walk, Jody Druken's jury is still unsure about
some key testimony they heard during his six-week trial.
The Newfoundland Supreme Court
jury deliberating on a verdict regarding the first-degree murder
charge against him has now listened to taped testimony from three
witnesses.
Druken, 30, is accused of shooting
his older brother, Derek Druken, in broad daylight with a .22-calibre
handgun.
The 33-year-old victim was
shot twice in the upper body by on Nov. 20, 1996 in the parking
lot of Theatre Pharmacy on Queen's Road.
Jody Druken was arrested shortly
after the shooting and confessed to being the one who pulled
the trigger. However, two days later he said he didn't do it.
Two of three eye witnesses
at the scene that day couldn't confirm Jody Druken was the shooter.
The third identified him in a photo book.
On Friday morning, the jury
asked to hear again some of the evidence given by Tina French,
a former secretary of Dr. Colin Brown who's office was located
upstairs of the pharmacy.
She testified that Derek Druken
had been in the office when his brother and brother-in-law Gary
Reid came in that day.
A short time later, all three
ran downstairs and Derek Druken was found lying in the parking
lot.
Late Friday, the jury again
requested to hear more taped evidence. The testimony of Kim Coffin,
a bystander who had been walking to her car at the time of shooting.
She told the court she saw
three men in the area, one was in the parking lot, Derek Druken,
and the other two were on the sidewalk. She said Derek Druken
was facing the two men.
"He had a jacket in his
hand and was facing the two men. I only saw him for a minute
because he fell to the ground," she testified at the time.
"The man with the gun
just lifted his arm and shot twice, pointing at the man in the
parking lot. There was no pause, he lifted his arm and shot twice,"
Coffin said.
At the time of her testimony
she was asked if the man who fired the weapon was sitting in
the courtroom. She said she couldn't say.
On Thursday, the jury sent
a note to Justice Keith Mercer which read, "we have some
doubts/concerns about Harry Strickland's evidence. We would like
to hear his examination and cross-examination."
Strickland was also at the
scene at the time of the shooting. He told the court that he
saw the man holding the gun.
"He was holding the pistol
straight out. I heard the first shot and looked in that direction.
He sort of leaned a little bit and looked back up, pointed the
gun downward and fired another shot," Strickland said demonstrating.
He was later shown two photo
books by police to try and identify the shooter. One book didn't
contain a photo of Jody Druken, the other did.
Out of the first book Strickland
picked a photo of a man who he said, "looked like the shooter."
It wasn't Jody Druken.
However, from the second book
he did point to a photo of the accused.
Jody Druken
St. John's Telegram Bonnie
Belec, April 27, 1999
It appears the case against
Jody Druken wasn't as open and shut as everybody thought.
The 30-year-old St. John's
man who confessed to shooting his older brother in broad daylight
only to recant days later, walked out of the courtroom Sunday
a free man.
He was charged with first-degree
murder in connection with the death of Derek Druken, but a Newfoundland
Supreme Court jury acquitted Jody Druken after deliberating for
almost four days.
"I really don't know what
to think," said an overwhelmed Jody Druken, who has been
in custody since his brother's death on Nov. 20, 1996.
When the jury returned to the
courtroom Sunday afternoon, the foreman was asked what verdict
they reached on the first-degree murder charge.
"Not guilty," he
said.
His response created a wave
of relieved gasps. When he was asked how the jury stood on the
lesser and included offence of second-degree murder, he again
said not guilty.
Jody Druken's head fell to
his knees as his lawyer jumped to his feet to congratulate his
client.
The jury had been deliberating
since late Wednesday and had asked to hear taped testimony from
four key witnesses before rendering its verdict.
Three of the witnesses were
eye witnesses, two of whom couldn't identify Jody Druken as the
shooter and one who said he was. The other witness was the secretary
of a doctor whose office was on the top floor of Theatre Pharmacy.
Derek Druken, 33, was shot
twice in the upper body by a .22-calibre gun in the parking lot
of the pharmacy.
Dr. Colin Brown's secretary
previously told the court he had been in with the doctor that
day when Jody Druken and brother-in-law Gary Reid came into the
office.
The secretary said following
a brief exchange between the three men they all ran downstairs
and the next thing she knew Derek Druken had been shot.
Jody Druken said it's difficult
being accused of killing one's own brother, but he said he thanks
God and everyone who stood by him for the past two and a half
years for their support. Especially his lawyer.
Defence lawyer Jeff Brace said
he's always believed that his client was not responsible for
his brother's death.
"There's not a great deal
that can be said (about the verdict) other than they heard the
evidence and concluded he was not responsible for this crime,"
Brace said.
"People have to realize
with regards to the Druken family the name - unfortunately and
quite falsely as is obvious today - is quite synonymous with
guilt from the perspective of certain law enforcement people
in this city," he said.
He said there comes a point
time that the mere fact that a person has had trouble in their
past does not mean that they have done everything that someone
suggests they did.
"We also have to recognize
that tunnel vision is very much a part of law enforcement in
this city and it's clearly reflected here today," Brace
said.
Some of Jody Druken's family
members agree with Brace's submission.
Older brother Paul Druken,
who was present for the verdict, told reporters police should
take another look at their investigation involving both his brother's
death and the charge laid against his younger brother.
He said the police had the
wrong person standing trial for the death of Derek Druken.
The boys' mother, Shirley Druken,
also said the police have tunnel vision when it comes to her
family.
"It's time for the police
to start to wake up and realize that once they get a Druken they
can't stop the investigation. It all comes back to tunnel vision
with the police and they can't concentrate on anyone else for
doing something," she said.
Shirley Druken said once the
police suspected her youngest son of shooting his brother they
didn't even look for anyone else.
"They should start to
investigate again because Derek didn't shoot himself. There was
other people there who weren't even put on the stand and it makes
me wonder why," she said.
In the meantime, while she
said she still feels sad for the death of Derek Druken, she is
relieved that Jody Druken has been cleared of having been the
person who killed him.
Now that Jody Druken is a free
man he said he'll be trying to get his life back.
"I had a life before I
got locked up, I was starting to get into a bit of real estate,
but had to sell my share of the house because lawyers cost money.
But I'll to start all over again," he said.
Crown prosecutor Paul Adams
would offer no comment on the outcome of the case and it is not
known if an appeal will be launched.
Brace said he's sure Adams
will review the case, but whether he files an appeal or not will
remain to be seen.
"We hope they will see
the error of charging Mr. Druken, but I don't believe there's
any realistic grounds in this particular case," he said.
"Justice (Keith) Mercer
was very careful with the decisions he made and the decisions
made were done in consultation with counsel on every occasion,"
he said.
Crown reviewing Druken
verdict
BY HOLLY LAKE Special to
The Telegram, 4/27/99
The Department of Justice has
not decided if it will appeal the acquittal of Jody Druken on
a charge of first-degree murder.
"We have 30 days to decide
whether or not to file an appeal," said David Wells, director
of communications for the department.
Until then, the Crown Attorney
will be meeting with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary to review
the case and see if there are grounds for an appeal.
Druken, 30, was cleared Sunday
of a first-degree murder charge, and the lesser and included
offence of second-degree murder, after a Newfoundland Supreme
Court jury deliberated over nearly four days.
He had been charged in connection
with the death of his brother, Derek Druken, 33, who was shot
twice in a downtown parking lot in broad daylight in 1996.
Having initially confessed
to the crime, Jody Druken had been in custody since the death
on Nov. 20, 1996, despite later withdrawing his confession.
"Only time will tell where
we go from here," said Supt. Robert Shannahan, officer in
charge of the Criminal Investigation Division and responsible
for investigating the Druken case.
In reviewing it so far, Shannahan
said he believed the investigators and the Crown did a good job.
However, the probe is continuing.
"Certainly, as a result
of the verdict, the investigation remains open," said Shannahan.
"We will continue to go in whatever direction we feel is
necessary."
He refused to comment on possible
suspects.
Responding to allegations by
family members that the police have tunnel vision when it comes
to the Drukens, Shannahan said decisions or investigations would
never be based on a family name, be it good or bad. He said everybody
is treated equally.
"I can assure the Druken
family, and anyone else for that matter, that we deal with facts
and we deal with evidence. We don't investigate people based
on their previous history."
|
