Taxpayers should fund appeal by Tori Stafford killer Michael Rafferty: Ontario court

[BornRuff]

"Ontario’s top court has ruled that the public should fund a bid by Michael Rafferty to appeal his convictions in the murder of 8-year-old Victoria Stafford.

Appeal Court Justice Marc Rosenberg ruled Tuesday that Rafferty’s case is too complex for Rafferty to handle on his own with the assistance of duty counsel.

Rosenberg says in his decision that it’s in the interests of justice that Rafferty have a lawyer for his appeal and either Legal Aid Ontario or the government should pay.

Rafferty has been turned down four times by Legal Aid since his convictions in May 2012 for first-degree murder, sexual assault causing bodily harm and kidnapping in the Woodstock, Ont., girl’s death.
Rosenberg has ordered Rafferty’s case sent back to Legal Aid for reconsideration, but if it still refuses, Rafferty’s lawyer should be paid by the attorney general for Ontario.

Lawyer Paul Calarco argued at the Appeal Court earlier this month that one ground for Rafferty’s appeal is that the jury should have considered that he might have been only an accessory after the fact to Tori’s brutal murder."

This obviously is not going to sit well with most people. I don't love the idea of spending one extra penny on this guy.

The fact is though, appeals are an important part of our justice system. If the court finds that there are grounds for an appeal, money should not stand in the way.

I think there is zero chance this guy will ever see the light of day again, but I think we do still need to allow due process.

 

[lone wolf]

Maybe he should ask one of those pro bono lawyers

 

[BornRuff]

Maybe he should ask one of those pro bono lawyers

No lawyer is going to take on a case of this magnitude for this kind of person for free.

 

[SLM]

Whether it's paid by Legal Aid or through the Ontario Attorney General's office, does it matter? All the same source really.

 

[BornRuff]

Whether it's paid by Legal Aid or through the Ontario Attorney General's office, does it matter? All the same source really.

Pretty much, though Legal Aid does have a few other sources of revenue.

The point of this decision was essentially to ensure that he has some source of funding. Otherwise, if Legal Aid turned him down again, he would be on his own.

 

[damngrumpy]

What I find interesting is if he was an accessory to murder who did the murder.
Is there more here that we don't know? I agree the appeal system is part of the
justice system. If he has an appeal approved there is doubt in someone's mind.
I don't know enough or I don't remember all the details of the case to make a
comment as to guilt. Yes he was found guilty but under what circumstances?

 

[lone wolf]

The goof repeatedly raped his victim. No amount of therapy would exorcise those ghosts had Tori survived. He's as guilty of the murder as his partner.

 

[SLM]

Pretty much, though Legal Aid does have a few other sources of revenue.

The point of this decision was essentially to ensure that he has some source of funding. Otherwise, if Legal Aid turned him down again, he would be on his own.

The part of me that realizes how vitally important it is for legal cases to be decided on their merit and without prejudice understands that it's likely necessary for him to have this appeal.

But the very idea of him just turns my stomach. I recall seeing the missing posters of Tori on my street, it was Easter weekend (or near to it) and I was out for a walk with my daughter. Those moments just stay with you.

 

[BornRuff]

What I find interesting is if he was an accessory to murder who did the murder.

Terri-Lynne McClintic plead guilty to first degree murder in this case.

Is there more here that we don't know? I agree the appeal system is part of the
justice system. If he has an appeal approved there is doubt in someone's mind.
I don't know enough or I don't remember all the details of the case to make a
comment as to guilt. Yes he was found guilty but under what circumstances?

The appeal rules are pretty technical and granting an appeal doesn't necessarily mean that there is a real chance his innocent. An appeal is granted if they can make a reasonable argument that some sort of error of law was made during the trial. Because these murder cases are so long and complicated, it is almost always possible to find some error somewhere in the case.

The grounds in this case seem to all be based on the instructions that the judge gave to the jury.

 

[Sal]

What I find interesting is if he was an accessory to murder who did the murder.
Is there more here that we don't know? I agree the appeal system is part of the
justice system. If he has an appeal approved there is doubt in someone's mind.
I don't know enough or I don't remember all the details of the case to make a
comment as to guilt. Yes he was found guilty but under what circumstances?

his girlfriend perhaps because she lured the kid, look at the Bernardo case

in order to protect the system we have to pay *sigh*

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

What I find interesting is if he was an accessory to murder who did the murder.
Is there more here that we don't know? I agree the appeal system is part of the
justice system. If he has an appeal approved there is doubt in someone's mind.
I don't know enough or I don't remember all the details of the case to make a
comment as to guilt. Yes he was found guilty but under what circumstances?

His girlfriend admitted to killing Tory with a claw hammer after Rafferty raped the little girl.

 

[SLM]

His girlfriend admitted to killing Tory with a claw hammer after Rafferty raped the little girl.

Oddly reminiscent of Bernardo/Homolka wherein I think she was a horridly evil piece of work herself, but that being said I still don't want to see him out on the streets. Ever.

 

[shadowshiv]

Too bad we couldn't just flush these pieces of **** down a very large toilet.

 

[tay]

The appeal rules are pretty technical and granting an appeal doesn't necessarily mean that there is a real chance his innocent. An appeal is granted if they can make a reasonable argument that some sort of error of law was made during the trial. Because these murder cases are so long and complicated, it is almost always possible to find some error somewhere in the case.

The grounds in this case seem to all be based on the instructions that the judge gave to the jury.

As obscene as the case and the convicted are; Your assessment of the appeal process is correct and there is no chance he is jailed as a result of a technical error.


Justice is supposed to be 'blind' so they are not evaluating (through appeal) what he did but how the case was handled............