Ontario’s appeal court has overturned a conviction and ordered a fresh trial for a man who served 23 years in prison for the 1989 murder of a 10-year-old girl. However, the likelihood of a new trial taking place seems slim. The case involves withdrawn confessions, allegations of police collusion, and mishandled evidence that caught the attention of former federal justice ministers, suggesting a “miscarriage of justice” during Timothy Rees’s original trial over 30 years ago.
Although the appeal court’s ruling, released on Thursday, highlights various issues with the investigation and subsequent legal proceedings, it fails to definitively identify the person responsible for the strangulation death of Darla Thurrott. Rees, who has consistently proclaimed his innocence since the incident, expressed his frustration at being wrongly labeled a killer for so long.
The court document states that Thurrott went to bed on March 16, 1989, and was discovered deceased the following morning, with autopsy results confirming she was strangled. The household where the crime occurred included Darla, her mother Darlene Thurrott (later murdered in 1997), her baby brother, her mother’s partner Bill Wilson, her mother’s friend Jim Venditti, and landlord James Raymer, who had physical and cognitive disabilities.
Rees’s defense team suggests that Raymer could be the actual perpetrator of Darla’s murder. Rees, a friend of the household occupants, was present on the night of the tragedy. The evening involved socializing and drug use, with Darla retiring to bed around 9 p.m. while Rees slept in a nearby room. Raymer returned home late that night after work and choir practice before turning in for the night.
No signs of forced entry were discovered in the home, leaving the five individuals who slept there as potential suspects. Rees, then 25 years old, was later convicted of second-degree murder.
Court records indicate that Rees initially confessed to the crime during police interviews but recanted the confession later, citing coercion. A pivotal piece of evidence in Rees’s successful appeal was an undisclosed audio recording featuring Raymer’s statements to an officer following the murder. Raymer denied killing Darla but hinted at prior contact with her, creating ambiguity.
Despite the court’s acknowledgment of the undisclosed recording and other evidence pointing towards Raymer as a potential suspect, uncertainties remain. The court emphasized the need for transparency in such cases, highlighting the irregularities in the investigative process.
While a new trial has been ordered, the Crown has shown reluctance to pursue the case further. Speculation suggests that the Crown may opt to resolve the matter through alternative means rather than initiating a new trial, given the circumstances and revelations brought to light during the appeal process.