Wednesday, January 30, 2008

A NECESSARY DELAY

.

In order that I deliver you the most up to date information possible on wrongful convictions, it is necessary to delay the posting for 24 hours. This decision was made necessary based on information that I received late yesterday pertaining to the rules of justice in Canada from the 1950's. When this is all put together, you will see that the rules back then under the British system were not all that different than those of today, especially those rules that applied to the application of a free and impartial trial.

.

It is common place today to hear reference made to the Wilbert Coffin case as a case that happened prior to our Charter Of Rights And Freedoms, and therefore, certain aspects pertaining to the rules of law did not apply. This is nothing short of an excuse. Indeed, it is not a reason. It is celebrated cases such as the Coffin affair that have evolved as a playground for members of the legal profession. As Canadian citizens, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was assembled by our governing body for the protection of all, not just a group of swelled heads attempting to make a name for themselves.

.

Former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was heavy with the term "ordinary Canadians." I am not sure exactly as to what an ordinary Canadian consists of in our society. Within the depths of my Webster, I note that ordinary simply means, and I quote, "not exceptional or unusual, and undistinguished." The closest that I can muster for an opposite word is "out of the ordinary" and accordingly, Mr. Webster defines that word as "unusual, exceptional, and remarkable." Getting back to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I am no longer certain as to which category that I fall within.

.

I look forward to hearing from you in the next few days. I want to hear your thoughts, and read your comments on this important aspect of the case. You will also recall that I indicated there would be a special piece on police officer Lewis Sinnett. This is a necessary element of this case, I have always maintained that. The person that I have alluded to in the past month who is touting his own agenda of the Wilbert Coffin affair has made some very rude and uncomplimentary remarks with reference to the late officer Sinnett. This person is attempting to re-write history from the worn out pages of the transcripts of trial, and the Broussard Commission. The Broussard Commission was not at all about Wilbert Coffin. It was totally dealing with the late Jacques Hebert and his no nonsense approach to the goverment of Quebec and Maurice Duplessis.

.

.

Lew Stoddard

45 comments:

Paul Jones said...

Sir,

I feel sorry for any persons in Gaspé who may have pinned any hopes of getting anything remotely resembling some sort of verdict reversal of the Wilbert Coffin trial on you.

Nothing in your ramblings comes anywhere near close to being evidence that is new, insightful or even coherent.

You, Sir, are a self-absorbed windbag.

Please people, stop looking to this man for any type of answers in relation to the case of Wilbert Coffin. If he knew something, don't you think that he should have gotten around to it by now?

Paul Jones
Québec City

Gus Mitchell said...

Gee Paul, don't you know that the wind doesn't ever blow that hard in Vancouver. But when it does, it does so with fury and devastating results. Personally I think the old "windbag" has done a wonderful job presenting an alternate conclusion.

From your post, it looks like you are perhaps a new visitor to the site and have not yet read all the posts from the beginning as there certainly is a LOT that is new -- have a look, you may be surprised!

What kind of answers would you want? Perhaps Lew could fabricate some - as did the original investigators. Would that satisfy you?

Keep blowing Lew!

G Mitchell, Vancouver

Lew Stoddard said...

Hey Paul,

Good to hear from you! Go to the head of the class Paul, I am a self-absorbed windbag. I am always proud to be able to exercise my right to free speech.

You know what Paul, dog-gone it, I have to ask this question. If my ramblings are so bad, and out in left field, then how come Paul you have devoted so much time to reading it?

Your second paragraph indicates that you must have read it complete in order to arrive at that conclusion. That is the reason that they put an on/off switch on your computer.

I have noticed Paul that most of the opposition to my investigation of the Wilbert Coffin affair seems to centre around the Quebec City area? Perhaps you could enlighten me on that. You and a couple of what appears to be cronies of yours always seem to write with similar attitudes.

I would also encourage you Paul to strut your stuff and show us all that you can do a better job. You know the old saying Paul, "If your path is criticism, then show us a better way."

Paul, I want to take this opportunity and thank you for writing a comment to my site. I do suggest that you keep tuned, as who knows, something of interest just may tickle your fancy in the next few days on the site.

Lest we fail to provide that opportunity for you, I know for a fact that you are familiar with someone who is presently touting an agenda based on worn out pages from a trial transcript from 1954

Anyway Paul, thanks for reading my site.

Lew Stoddard
Host of Stoddard Online

Ps. . . Paul, I forgot something. I was just thinking, you appear bitter to-day. Could be too much exposure to all that frigid cold air and snow along the St. Lawrence. Carnival Cruises are offering some great deals on mid winter Caribbean cruises. Guaranteed to clear depression on a cold Quebec winter day.

Lynne Dugas said...

I am shocked at the terrible things said by you today paul, you have the right to your opinion, but before you speak, and put your foot in your mouth, you should read, this site and learn about Wilbert Coffin, and all the fine work Lew as done concerning this case. The Coffin family has suffered enough when they lost Wilbert, and they need positive and caring feedback. You do know Paul there is an old saying, if you have nothing nice to say don,t say anything at all, I think that might help you the next time you feel like blowing some wind. It may also help to take into account the feelings of the Coffin family.

Paul Jones said...

I'm not opposing what you call an investigation. What I do oppose is that you are stringing people along. I'm not the one who is giving people the impression that somehow all this verbiage equals some kind of proof that Wilbert Coffin was innocent.

Sure, I'd like to think that he didn't do it. Like most Gaspesians, I find comfort in the thought that one of us got screwed. It is a much more romantic notion than that of believing that one of ours killed another human being in cold blood.

The fact is that there were many people in the Gaspé of the day who actually believed that he did do it. Among these people were some of his Ash Inn and Baker Hotel cronies. But the reality of a small town is such that the ones who actually believed he did it simply bit their tongues and let the people who came to Bill Coffin's defence have their say. Social peace.

Did Bill Coffin get a competent defence? No.

Was there political pressure? Absolutely.

Was he guilty? Based on the evidence that I have read, yes.

Should he have been hanged. No. Because I believe capital punishment to be wrong.

Will it be shown that he didn't do it? I don't believe so.

I'd really like to be wrong, but in this instance I don't think that I am.

If we were to take all the evidence, change all of the names, and have this case forwarded to the Crown, they would undoubtedly go ahead with charges.

Was there bumbling and bungling in this case? Absolutely. You could point at all of the players and say this or that was wrong in terms of their participation in this case. But the man who had the most to lose in this, Bill Coffin, said nothing in his own defence. You could say that it was a mistake on his lawyers' part. You could also say that they realized that his version of events didn't hold water. They took a gamble that the Crown would not be able to prove, beyond what the jury would perceive to be any reasonable doubt that Coffin was guilty. On this count they were wrong.

All this being said, I don't believe that anything you have said over the course of thousands of words adds up to showing that the verdict was wrong or that any great injustice was made. You think the opposite and that is your absolute right.

I also want to address your concerns about my living in Québec City and this area being some kind of hotbed of opposition to your cause. I know of no such group, association or any other such entity. I am a big boy and can make up my own mind about things.

G Mitchell said...

Good post Paul.
If you had used the same tone and logic in your first post, you wouldn't have raised the testosterone levels.

Gus Mitchell
Vancouver

Anonymous said...

I THINK PEOPLE LIKE PAUL, JUST LIKE TO LEAVE NEGATIVE COMMENTS TO SEE IF THEY CAN GET A REACTION OUT OF US.HE CANT BE SERIOUS.

NORM
MONTREAL,QUEBEC.

Bob Sinclair said...

This message is for Norm in Montreal.

With reference to Paul, he is in need of his 15 minutes of fame.

As Lew Stoddard mentioned earlier to him, the stage is set for him to show us a better way. he should understand talk is real cheap, but actions are stronger than words.

Bob Sinclair
(Former Gaspesian)

Janice Prevost said...

Mr Paul Jones,

Where have you been for the past number of decades? Answer me this question, "Where was the Wilbert Coffin case prior to Mr. Stoddard doing his investigation and writing of the affair for the past two years?"

Very quickly I can tell you where it was as it is evident that it was filed away in some forgotten box of dusty papers. Mr. Stoddard has brought this case to the front, re-kindled the flame, and as a result thousands of Canadians are now aware of the terrible travesty of justice that was allowed to happen.

You got the nerve sir to suggest that he is a self-absorbrd windbag in a very rude and crude way. I know for a fact that I knew of this case, but I really knew nothing about it until Mr. Stoddard came along. Then someone such as yourself makes a completely assinine sttement such as you did.

I am thinking sir that the knowledge that you display about this case is telling us all that you know just enough to know that you really don't know anything at all about it.

Janice Prevost
Quebec

Ken McDougal said...

To Paul Jones, you say that you are a "big boy" and that you are capable of making up your own mind about various things regarding this affair compared to those around you.

You go on to declare to the people of Gaspe to not be swayed by Lew Stoddards writings. Are you really saying that these people are not capable of making up their own minds as well, or do should they be relying on you for guidance. I am sure there are a number of "big boys" and "big girls" in the gaspe as well.

Ken McDougal
Halifax

Paul said...

To the disciples of Lew, I would ask this. Tell me exactly why you think Bill Coffin was innocent.

He was found guilty by a jury of his peers. All appeals were exhausted. An inquiry was held into the actions of the police and the court officials. All of these instances came to the same conclusion. Bill Coffin was guilty.

He had the means, the opportunity and the motive. You may not believe so, but the jury did. He lied about the theft. You could say that lying about stealing does not equal murder and I agree.

But think about this, you steal from someone and they turn up dead. You get hauled into the police station and its very clear to you that fingers are starting to point your way. So instead of coming clean on the theft and being forthright with the police about what you did and what you know, you start lying. And you stick to your lies through the trial, through all the appeals and then suddenly when they start tying to the knot you say "Ok, ok, I was just kidding about not stealing from them. I did steal from them after all. Actually I didn't take their money and they gave me the pocket knife, but I took the other stuff.".

Right from the start his position was deny, deny, deny. "They're not men enough to break me!". Well if you truly didn't do something that you are accused of, getting into a pissing contest is the last thing that you want to do. No you tell them what you really know, what you really did and you cooperate. Because if you really didn't do it, you don't want anybody wasting time and energy investigating you because you had nothing to do with it and to interfere will cause you nothing but grief.

Sure it's a sad story. Sure it has been a heavy burden for the family to bear. But the York cemetery, as all cemeteries, is full of sad, tragic stories.

I can't see how this case will make it past its initial review. We'll see.

As for Ken, I'm expressing an opinion, nowhere in there do I say anything that can be remotely interpreted as asking people to rely on me for guidance. Don't attribute any agenda to me or my position.

I believe that Bill Coffin did it. A lot of people in Gaspé feel and felt the same way. I'll admit that this view does not lend itself to books and songs, but it is important to realize that not everyone is of the view that an innocent man was sent to the gallows.

No matter which side of the fence you find yourself on this story, there are many lessons to be found within its covers.

Lynne Dugas said...

I am again writing in response to Paul, I can,t believe the stuff your saying, do you have any idea how disrespectful your being, to the Coffin family, and to the memory of Wilbert. I wonder Paul, have you been to Gaspe, you talk about people there and you seem to have no clue what your talking about, there are alot of people who believe Wibert was innocent, and they want too see his coviction overturned. I know this because I have been to Gaspe many times. I have talked with people that knew Wilbert and said he could never do anything like this. You talk about this man like he is nothing, Wilbert Coffin was a man of integrity and strength something you Paul know nothing about. How can you be so heartless, to this family, who has worked so hard for Wilbert, his sister Marie has cancer and is undergoing treatment, but still does all she can for her brother, and all the work this family and Lew are doing is wonderful, and you have the audacity to come here and talk like this about wilbert and hurt his family some more with your unfeeling uncaring lousy opinions. Yeah there are tragic stories in every cemetary, and this one very tragic story, but you continue to hurt this family, again paul think before you speak, I think you owe the Coffin family an apology, but really paul I don,t think your man enough to do that. That too me is tragic.

paul said...

The goal here is not to hurt anyone. I'm simply saying that based on the evidence, a jury said he did it. Appeal attempts were shot down. A Commission of Inquiry held to study the whole case showed no grounds to overturn the verdict.

That the family is doing everything they can to push for a review is perfectly understandable and admirable.

As for strength and integrity. Some will give you strength, but integrity? Come on. Stealing from people, lying about it to the police (this really happened, it is a fact, a proven fact, a fact that Coffin himself admitted) is not integrity.

Let's not set him up for sainthood. He was a hard drinking man who would fight at the drop of a hat. Any oldtimer from Gaspé, York, Wakeham, Sandy Beach, L'Anse-aux-Cousins, Sunny Bank or anywhere else who knew anything about him would say the same. Anyone who witnessed a Saturday night at York Hall in the 40's and 50's and is the least little bit honest would agree.

Obviously this is a very pro-review site. I understand that and I don't want to provoke you any further so I'll be leaving now. I believe he did it, you believe he was innocent.

I'll take my opinions and leave now.

Regards,

Paul

Anonymous said...

Mr. Paul Jones,
You seem to know so much about Gaspe and the coffin case…you call Wilbert coffin “Bill” instead of Wilbert? It is safe to assume that you are one of those old cronies you speak of?
I also spoke to some of the old cronies, guess what, they all told me they believe Wilbert coffin was framed…
Guess you haven’t have the chance to get to many parties lately Paul, ill fill you in,
At the end of the night everyone wants to “fight at the drop of a hat”…
Almost all the men in Gaspe had the means, motive and opportunity to kill those three American hunters ….
Now since Eugene Lindsey was warned not to come back to Gaspe again, and also he was a man after all the women, ummmmm, I just wonder whose woman he was after in 1953…. Do you know Paul?

You ask why people thought Wilbert coffin did not kill the Americans.
Wilbert coffin was known to steal; all Gaspe knew this about him…
Now, he did steal those things, and then he sat down and told half of Gaspe that he had stuff belonging to the American hunters…along with the fuel pump….
As you know, Gaspe is a small town, news travels real fast. So, everyone knew he had stolen those things, so the men who wanted the Americans dead knew they had the perfect man to frame, and there you go……plans move into action….
I do believe there is no one in this world dumb enough to murder three people, and then go into town and talk about all the stuff you have belonging to the men you just murdered.
To know very well that the owner of the garage saw him there with Richard Linsesy when the fuel pump was purchased…
Think about it. Its just common sense…
Many people knew exactly where the three Americans would be in the woods…
The owner of the garage where they purchased the fuel pump, the three men who pulled them out when their truck was stuck, the same three men who told them to go back to Gaspe and what route to take to go back into the woods, and so on….. Think about it...
Now Paul, you say Wilbert coffin had the means, opportunity, and the motive…would you like to tell us what they were?
You also said “Steal from someone and they turn up dead”…I believe Wilbert coffin had no idea when he stole from the Americans, that they would be turning up dead….
Would you agree then Paul, since you know Gaspe so well, let’s be honest here, that in the 50’s and 60’s a lot of people in Gaspe had American money? There were a lot of American tourists, and guess what, they used American money… Hell, I had some in the 60’s too….
Oh no, this murder was not as simple as a robbery….
If you have trouble to figure that out Paul, then you must be as stupid as the police were back in 1953.

Anonymous said...

Dear Paul
food for thought eh! sure brings a lot of emotion to the forefront . If i wasnt so tired of fighting people with your attitude i might write a real nasty reply but what would that accomplish . Nothing Im after justice . You are right our family has had to battle a few peoples attitude over the years that are similar to yours . To be brutely honest i cant fathom why people wonder why we are fighting this. Are you really trying to tell us that you believe nothing is wrong with what was done to my uncle . Think about it if nothing was done wrong that means police are allowed to threaten people from giving evidence that would have thrown grave doubt as to my uncles guilt if not proved outright. ie letter written by one of the murdered victims dated the day after my uncle was proved to be in montreal . Do you want the prosecution to be able to take all the members of a jury of your peers to a movie and dinner? Would you like to be in a financial situation where some lawyer whose father is partners with the man who has decided that you must be prosecuted rapidily by whatever means come to you and offer free services. Just think of what we have felt like over the years about that. would you like to live in a country where the only honest police who tried to help you was threatened to be thrown in a hospital for not being mentally compentant if he did not stop helping you.... remember this actually happened to him for no other reason than he was for the truth. Would you like a jury of your peers that was suppose to be bilingual contain those who could speak only french and those who could speak english? The list is staggering sir so please please dont waste our time by telling us that nothing is wrong with this case. It is the definative case of why thankfully that we do not have capital punishment in this country anymore.
Another thing I want to make really clear to you that for every person who has said they believe my uncle is guilty at least 999 have come up to me telling me that not only was my uncle innocent of this crime he the kindest man they met and then told me so many wonderful things that my uncle had done for them
Diane Peter
Uncle Bill's niece
pinning my hopes on the truth

Anonymous said...

Thank you very much to all those across Canada and around the world who have come forward to stand by our side and fight for justice with us. Words cannot really say everything my family feels for your kindness in pouring over countless pages of documents to prepare Blogs , newspaper articles Books and preparing for court. Thank you to all the hundreds of people who have come forward with information to help the upcoming court case and aiding others in keeping this case in the forefront till real justice is served . Thank you so much everyone of you who has jumped between our family and those who would try to rip us apart. It is overwhelming to feel your love kindness and support and real empathy. We could not do without one of you.
For any who still have information to help us in our fight I encourage you to join the fight and tell what you know no matter how small you think your information is we need it and it may be the last few pieces of the puzzle we need. Thank you again everyone for your kind words of encouragement , love and prayers
Uncle Bills niece
Diane peter

Colleen Holmes said...

It is obvious that the nay sayers recognize where the respect and support for this case has appeared in the past two years. I am speaking of this web page and the hard work of Lew Stoddard under the most trying of circumstances who has gone out into the field in an effort to bring affairs to the front and put them together.

It would be an impossibility for anyone who truthfully is interested in this case to be able to say that they have not learned something on these pages on an on going basis.

For anyone to say that nothing in the work of this site presents anything that is new, then I will suggest that you really don't know anything about the case in the first place. If you did you would quickly spot many, many things that the public did not know before this page came into existence.

If more people would have really searched for the truth over the years instead of grasping at sensationalism, the right thing would have been accomplished decades ago with all the work that Lew Stoddard has put into this thing. Even though Ms. Diane Peter does not mention him specifically, I am certain that she is referring to Mr. Stoddard.

Colleen Holmes
Woodstock, New Brunswick

S Nevers said...

My favourite Sunday morning activity, bringing myself up to date on the Coffin case. Lew, as usual, your site does not disappoint me. Don't let these "know it all's" muddy the waters. I like the way you handle things because I know your next posting will scuttle their ship. Keep up the excellent work Sir.

I am anxious to read your upcoming piece on police officer Sinnett.

S. Nevers
Saint John, N B

Roland Maher said...

A lot of people should go back and review your work on the autopsy reports on this case. If they are still happy with the way it was done and reported on by the officials prior to the trial, then their brains really do lack substance. You made a mountain of sense in your investigation of this portion of this case.

Roland Maher
Rimouski

Robert Racette said...

Mr. Stoddard,

It sems that no matter which theory that one chooses in this whle sordid affair there are ways of tearing it down. I must say that I do support most of what you have said during the course of your writing and investigation of this case. I say that because you have obviously taken the time to study it completely and have not relied too heavily on what others have said before you.

When I analyze your case compared to the crowns theory, yours simply comes out on top. Had the crown presented all the evidence collected, then based on what you have been saying, you would have easily won the case in Wilbert Coffin's favor.

I encourage you Sir to keep up the pressure on this, and to let you know that there are many Canadians behind you all the way on this.

Robert Racette
University student from Toronto

Martin C said...

Excellent letter from Robert Racette. I agree with him all the way.

One only has to look at the way the trial and inquest was assembled to determine that the case was weighted heavily against Wilbert Coffin.

I first learned of this case through my Grand Dad, found it interesting. I am planning a law degree down the road, so many examples of injustices portrayed in your overall story. You are writing it well Sir in a very articulate manner, very easy to follow and comprehend. Thank you.

Martin C.
Florenceville, New Brunswick

K Williams said...

I am curious as to what this Fortin dude is up to. He has waited for over 50 years to tell society what it has already known for 50 years.

The only things being different is the fact that he only presents a one sided approach from trial transcripts and doesn't account for all the evidence that was held back.

Hard to believe that someone who identifies with the law profession would come up with these revelations. Where is the old formula of sifting through all the evidence, weighing it, and then making a declaration on it?

K Williams
Port Alberni, B C

Anonymous said...

So where is the update?

gaspésienne said...

I think Paul has a point. Ever since the story became news (again!) last year, a great many news organizations in Quebec have started to seek out the original court transcripts. And even those who thought he was innocent are having second thoughts. Because while the trial was a farce, and would probably not hold up to today's judicial standards, there was a lot of incriminating evidences that cast a doubt on Coffin's credibility.

Someone mentionned here that a lot of your critics come from Quebec. Well, duh! Quebecers know the story inside out because many of those who lived it are still alive and talking, and are likely to understand subtelties on the case that don't necessarly reach the west coast.

In fact, most in Gaspé's ENGLISH community (Coffin was anglophone) are actually convinced he's guilty. And these are people who actually knew him!

Did it warrant the kind of trial he got? NO. Does it make your critics ignorant and stupid? NO. If you're the journalist you claim to be, you'd appreciate the fact there's a second side to this story, one which you may choose to ignore.

Michèle Nadeau

Anonymous said...

Michéle
'Most of Gaspé's ENGLISH community are actually convinced he was guilty' ????? Where on earth do get this from??? MOST of Gaspé's community, ENGLISH & FRENCH, believe he was railroaded and was INNOCENT....and many of these are people who actually knew him!!! Myself included..and I live on the West Coast as do many other Gaspésians and former 'Quebecers' who share this opinion!
Lani Baker Mitchell

Jérôme Lafortune said...

Attaches ta tuque avec de la broche Michèle, les commentaires vont suivrent...

Anonymous said...

I have some questions. It was said that officer sinnett stopped a car where the two occupants wore shirts covered in blood, they told officer sinnett they had shot a moose…officer sinnett decided not to question them, take down their license plates number, or search their car for a moose, or for weapons of any kind that could have been used for this killing of a moose…then officer sinnett said that shooting a moose out of season was not high on the offence scale in the Gaspe.
Why then in March,3rd 1952 was Wilbert coffin arrested for shooting a deer out of season. I read this on the information of the Brossard commission.
I also read there that there was a note written by Thomas Patterson that he left behind dated June 13 1953 to inform the others searching where he could be reached.
Why was he searching for the hunters when they only went missing on July 9th 1953, this is said to be the date the police from the states contacted Mr. Miller.

Also written there is that it was Mr. Thomas Patterson that told Mr. miller that Mr. Wilbert coffin had taken one of the hunters to Gaspe to a garage, when the hunters were reported missing??
If Mr. Thomas Patterson had this information, how many others knew of this, the information had to have come from the garage where Mr. Coffin and Richard Lindsey purchased the fuel pump...?
This is very strange information coming from the Brossard commission

Boss Hogg said...

Lewis Sinnett was a nice enough fellow but nobody who knew him would tell you that he was anywhere near the sharpest tool in the shed.

Roscoe P. Coltrane from the Dukes of Hazzard comes to mind :-)

Jan McLennan said...

Hang in there Lew, give it full steam ahead. You will make headway real quick on this now, with this phoney Brossard Inquiry stuff showing up.

Jan McLennan
Abbotsford

Jerry McCallum said...

Hello Mr. Stoddard,

I've enjoyed reading your posts over the course of the past months. In your latest post, you mentioned that there would be a 24 hour delay before your next post. Could you give us an hint as to when we can expect to read more?

Thank you.

gaspegal said...

to answer Boss Hogg..I would say that the same goes for you..missing a few bolts up in the chicken house..
also who are you to judge another human being ?

Boss Hogg said...

To gaspegal,

He sees two guys with bloody shirts, doesn't ask for their names, doesn't note their plate even if they admitted to committing an offence.

Go get 'em Columbo!

P.S. You ask who am I to judge, yet you say I'm "missing bolts up in the chicken house". Hmmm... I'd like five pounds of chicken house bolts please...

gaspegal said...

To Boss Hogg.

At the time this officer saw these gentlemans in their cars.. bloodied.. the american hunters had not gone missing yet...

as for the bolts..out of stock... marbles are available..free of charge..

B. H. said...

So seeing two guys who are bloodied is only suspicious if someone is missing?

So you only take notes if someone is missing?

So two guys tell you they committed a crime but you only act if someone is missing?

So only the cops that were not from Gaspé were incompetent and it's impossible that a cop from Gaspé was also incompetent?

Barney Fife...

Anonymous said...

Lewis Sinnett may not have been THE brightest light on the Christmas tree, but he was, nevertheless, a light that shone as bright as most others on that same tree!...and for his many living family members-wife & kids, he was a special and loved man who did his best.
As for his meeting the two men in the woods, Lewis was on his way to a strike at St Anne de Monts ( if I remember correctly) and anyone who remembers the climate in the Gaspé when there was labour unrest, would understand the urgency to get there. (Also I believe that at that time, it was the job of the forest wardens not the provincial police to fine people who shot moose out of season.)
I think that Lewis recognized these two men in the car and would know where to find them later if he needed to do that. ( although he wasn't aware of the murders at the time)It's my belief that because he knew them, he took them at their word, and hurried on to the strike... and only realized the possible significance when he learned of the murders. He then reported this event to his superiors who ordered him to keep his mouth shut! In the taped interview, when he's asked who the two men were or if he recognized the license plate, he answers " I couldn't say.".... not "I don't know!".

Lani Baker Mitchell said...

Oops! Forgot to add my name to above posting...

Anonymous said...

To b.h and boss Hog….you said it well. I was wondering why no one out there could get it. Finely, someone did…oh ,I disagree…I don’t believe officer sinnet was stupid at all; he got away with not turning in the men, maybe friends of his!!
It has been said so many times, officer sinnett was in a great hurry…
He was in such a hurry, but yet he took his valuable time to stop this car??? To do that something must have made him suspicious, or maybe as Lana said, he knew the men, but he didn’t just meet them in the woods, it has been said (he stopped the car) or maybe just stopped them to chat….
He said “I couldn’t say” I just don’t fall for that… (He could find them later if he needed to), well maybe before Mr. Coffin was hanged would have been a great time!!! He let an innocent man hang here, there is no excuse for that…
I believe it would have been officer sinnetts responsibility to report the shooting of the moose out of season to the forest warden, and to bring the men in for questioning. Office sinnett being from the Gaspe knew very well by shooting a moose those men would not be covered in blood!! How well did he know the men I wonder?
There were laws, even in the fifties…. Mr. Wilbert coffin was arrested in 1952 for the shooting of a deer out of season?? On what date did officer sinnett pull over that car??
You can paint a pretty picture of anyone you want, loving, kind, sincere, and I am sure they are all that to family and friends… although sometimes there is a dark side that will surface…you see this everyday on the news of murders….

There is also the note that is lying around….
It was officer sinnett who revealed the existence of the note. Note is dated June 13, 1953…
It has been proven beyond a doubt that it was written by Thomas Miller, who had been active in searching for the hunters, and that He left it behind on a rock to inform the others where he could be reached if it was necessary...
Why was Thomas Miller searching for the hunters on June 13 1953??
When the American police only contacted Thomas Miller on July 9, 1953, to ask him to locate the American hunters??
It is said Thomas Miller knew the area that Eugene Lindsey favored for hunting, because he had been a guide for him in 1951…
Also, by the woods permits, Thomas Miller had a woods permit to enter the woods dated for June 08, 1953…How long did he stay in the woods?
In the testimony of Thomas Millers wife, Esther, she was at Russell Patterson’s visiting, when the call came in from the Police in Hollidaysburg that the hunters were missing… since Thomas miller said he received the call, then I guess Russell Patterson was out somewhere, because it seems Thomas Miller must have answered Russell Patterson’s telephone????
I believe there was some other reason that note was left behind…..
this just dont add up.......

Anonymous said...

You say officer sinnett was on his way to a mine strike in ste. Anne de monts… could you tell us what mine that was? I am very curious to know the name of the mine in ste Anne de monts?? Also what was the date officer sinnet went to that mine strike, and pulled over that vehicle?
I know there was a mine strike in Murdoch Ville, in march of 1957; the conflict lasted seven months…
Does anyone know the name of the mine in ste Anne de monts??

Lew Stoddard said...

Hello,
Who is looking for the name of the mine at St. Anne de Monts? You know my name, I want to assist you, but in fairness, who are you?

A question worthy of being asked, is also worthy of introduction of the information seeker.

Lew Stoddard

Brett Samuels said...

Hey Lew,

I couldn't agree with you more. These people who hide under a log, I would not have the time of day for them anymore. You are too patient my friend. Keep up the good work. I can guarantee you that this person is only trying to use something against you.

Whoever you are, get off your butt and do a little research of your own. I'll bet you have not read this story from the beginning. I'll bet you are a lazy oaf always trying to get someone else to do your work for you.

Brett Samuels
Burlington

Anonymous said...

Ditto on that last commenter. I agree with you here in North Bay.

Bob Cramer
North Bay, Ont

Jerry McCallum said...

Mr. Stoddard,

Glad to see that you are back. I asked a little while back when we could expect your next post. On January 30th you stated that we could expect something in the next 24 hours, then nothing.

Thanks and keep up the good work!

Jerry McCallum
Kenora, ON

Lew Stoddard said...

There will be a posting up on the board later tonight which will address a few things.

Thank you Jerry for your note. Good to hear from you. Medical problems kept me down for awhile, but up and running again now.

Lew Stoddard
Host Of Stoddard Online

Jerry McCallum said...

Thanks Lew.

Hang in there and look forward to reading your post.

Jerry

J Beaumont said...

Hi Lew Stoddard,

I am very very glad to see you back. I know of your illness, but I am so impressed that you are able to carry on with your site. We need you here to lay the law down once in awhile.

I hope you are feeling better. I took the opportunity and tracked down Marie Coffin one day a couple of weeks ago to see if she had heard from you. She had and said you were doing better.

Jenny Beaumont
Hartland, New Brunswick