Stoddard Online

Stoddard Online . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LETTER TO THE EDITOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


This is an open letter to the editor of The Montreal Gazette Newspaper,and as well, to reporter Marian Scott. It is being transmitted via my web site for two reasons. Firstly, by doing it this way, it is guaranteed to be published. Secondly, it is guaranteed to be published in it's entirety without having it's strength diminished through editing. As well, I am also making available here the letter to the editor and reporter that was transmitted to me from Lani (Baker) Mitchell with reference to the same story.

I am writing with specific reference to your story of November 18 of the Wilbert Coffin affair, written by staff reporter, Marian Scott. Without doubt, this story is a true example of journalistic freedom of speech gone wild. Indeed, if such freedom exists for a professional publication to routinely toss out trash such as this to an uninformed public, then that same freedom must exist for me to speak out against it.

I will go on record here and state, not a person exists in Canada that has done more exhaustive investigation and research than what I have done on this case. I therefore, take great exception to many of your comments in this story, particularly those associated with William (Bill) Baker of Gaspe'. Frankly, in my view, your comments about this man are cruel, and are made without foundation.

It is not necessary here that I repeat what was contained in the article. Lani (Baker) Mitchell has done a fine job of that. I will tell you this though and I ask that you pay careful attention. In my research, I conducted a special, separate, and independent study of Bill Baker and his association with Wilbert Coffin. I can tell you this , there was nothing that turned up anything of the nature of what you suggest. I will further state, that what Lani (Baker) Mitchell states with reference to Bill Baker, it concurs absolutely with my findings as well.

You make reference to "Other Theories." Webster defines theory as "an organized body of ideas as to the truth of something, usually derived from the study of a number of facts relating to it." From that, I presume Ms. Scott that you are in possession of that organized body of ideas complimented by the facts relating to your reference of Bill Baker's involvement. I am challenging you. I am calling your hand. It is time to turn your cards over. What are your facts?

On occasion Ms. Scott you have phoned me, always on the pretence of telling me what a great job I am doing on the web site, but within a few moments into the call, you are asking in a round about way if I can give you this person or that person's phone number or e-mail address. I would never do that of course, but you do try. On occasion, you have asked me about this and that scenario pertaining to my investigation and the case. My answer is always the same, check the web site and you will find it out when the rest of Canada finds out.

I did tell you one thing though Marian. I explained that I have a couple of revelations coming up at the conclusion of this story. I further explained that when this time arrives, I would keep you in mind for a real scoop on this story. That day is not far off Marian, and I can personally guarantee, you would be most interested. Perhaps, it will happen in the next couple of weeks, definitely, within the month. I have to tell you Marian, things have changed dramatically. Offering you the scoop on the story is not going to happen. That is, until such time as you write and publich a full retraction and apology to the Baker family for the grief and embarassment that your story caused.

The following is the letter written by Lani (Baker) Mitchell to the Montreal Gazette. I was not aware that Lani (Baker) Mitchell had sent this letter, nor is she aware that I have sent mine.

I have just received a copy of your November 18th article on the Coffin case written by Marion Scott, and would like to point out that Ms. Scott is providing coverage to her readers, not through valuable research that one would expect from a leading paper, but through rehashing of old gossip and innuendo found in books known to be full of errors. In her comments " Gaps in Case Against Coffin", Ms. Scott has decided, once more, to provide your readers with titillating hurtful information on my Uncle Bill Baker of Gaspé. " Some have speculated that Coffin took the rap for his friend, Billy Baker, a rollicking alcoholic, who was the son of a local hotel keeper." Our family takes great offense to this! Bill Baker was NOT a rollicking alcoholic. Where on earth did Ms. Scott gather this destructive information? Bill Baker was NOT the son of a local hotel owner! Bill Baker was THE hotel owner. Ms. Scott goes on to suggest that Bill Baker died by means of suicide. This is UNTRUE. Bill Baker died of a heart attack , and he WAS NOT age 42 when he died, but aged 46. He did not die two weeks after Coffin's hanging. At least get basic information right! When my Montreal sister showed this article to her Gaspésian friends who knew Uncle Bill, they were horrified and said, "That is not the Bill Baker that I knew." I speak for my Baker family when I tell you that this article is very offensive to all nine of we children, nieces and nephews of Bill Baker. It is time that a newspaper such as yours stopped reprinting old and suggestive material, and begin to show leadership in providing correct information, easily obtained by studying available documents and talking with the people who were actually involved in this case, rather than relying on those who have made a career of writing books based on misinformation. Marion Scott might try reading www.stoddardsviews.blogspot.com closely where information is given only after careful factual support is found. As well, Ms. Scott might consider that she writes of someone who was loved and respected by many, not some Gaspésian buffoon who makes for a " good story." Lani Baker Mitchell, speaking for the Baker family.

Lew Stoddard
Posted to site December 03, 2006