Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
When it comes to the ability for Canadians to be engaged on the subject, I think that's part of the reason why we have this before us. It's because we have examples like the wrongful conviction of Donald Marshall Jr. and the role of racial bias that was such a significant part of what led to a 17-year-old indigenous boy being wrongfully accused of murder and subsequently convicted and incarcerated for more than a decade.
I think that in the case of Mr. Marshall—as I've done some research, contrary to what Mr. Bittle is suggesting—there is a passion of Canadians to engage on this subject and, in that democratization of information, specifically with things like podcasts and Internet sites, there is the ability for people to coalesce, build communities and find support. That, I think, speaks directly to the issue at hand.
Madam Chair, because I do want to ensure that my colleagues have a chance to engage on this subject as well, in the case of the wrongful conviction of Mr. Marshall, we have an example here. I know that in representing, as was referenced earlier, my constituency, Battle River—Crowfoot, the Battle River was known to be the location of a series of battles that took place between different indigenous tribes throughout history, and in Crowfoot, named after Chief Crowfoot, who was a legendary indigenous leader on the plains. Certainly, I have a lot to say about him and the legacy he left in the creation of the modern Canada that we have today, and especially in the role he played in some of the negotiations of treaties and what that looks like for the creation of the country we have here today.
I would just note that in the wrongful conviction of Mr. Marshall and the role that racial bias played in that, it was found that there were systemic failures that contributed to Mr. Marshall's wrongful conviction and that, as we see today, were not seen at the time. These led to this wrongful conviction and a miscarriage of justice and speak to a breakdown in that needed tension that I referenced earlier.
In the example of Mr. Marshall—I could get into a few more—the Government of Nova Scotia appointed a royal commission to investigate the errors that occurred. The Marshall inquiry asked for recommendations to ensure that similar mistakes could be avoided.
The Marshall inquiry identified errors at virtually every stage of the process.
The responding police officers failed to search the area and question witnesses. The investigating officer held a known racial bias against Mr. Marshall; I won't read into the record one of the quotes there, because it certainly has some very strong language and I wouldn't want to bring disorder here. The Crown prosecutor failed to interview witnesses who gave contradictory statements and to disclose these inconsistencies to the defence. Mr. Marshall's defence counsel did not interview Crown witnesses and failed to ask for disclosure of the Crown's case. Also, the officers who investigated the case in 1982 improperly pressured Mr. Marshall to falsely admit that he had attempted a robbery, and the Court of Appeal used this statement to suggest that Mr. Marshall was partly to blame for his wrongful conviction.
To summarize this as an example that relates clearly to the overall conversation, I would suggest, Madam Chair, that we take this very seriously, that we look at some of these issues and we make sure that in the process of the discussions we have before this committee we ensure that we find the right tension, because we cannot allow the system to be bogged down with nefarious complaints of people who were convicted for breaking the law, whether that be serious crime or simple and nominal things.
However, at the same time, we need to ensure that when there are miscarriages of justice, because to err is to be human, we find that tension.
With that, I would cede my time to the next speaker, but I would ask, Madam Chair, to be put on the list. I know that I look forward—and I hope that Mr. Bittle will pay very close attention to—the further meaningful interventions that we will have, whether they be on such important examples as I've just referenced or on the many other pieces of this that speak to the importance of our getting this right to maintain that tension that needs to exist within the administration of justice within our country.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would ask to be put back on the speaking list. Thank you.