Wednesday, November 26, 2008


THE TIME HAS COME. . .
.
.
.
.
It is unfortunate that some folks may be led astray and off the focus of the real issues surrounding the Wilbert Coffin case. All the garbledy gook about Jeeps, stuff that went nowhere, and continues to go nowhere. Who saw what Jeep, what was the colour, how was it constructed, who were the occupants if it existed, and the biggest question of all, was there a jeep in the area that Wilbert Coffin claimed? Those questions and statements can and will be argued and embellished upon until the end of time.
.
Wilbert Coffin was being made out to be a liar in 1953 and 1954 with reference to his claim to have seen a Jeep vehicle, and there are those today still preaching the same sermon. I'll make a tiny suggestion to anyone caught up in this furore. "Get yourself a coffee, sit back, relax and read on," because I can state emphatically that "yes" a Jeep did exist in the area where Wilbert Coffin claimed to have seen it. The question begging an answer now would be, can I prove that statement?
.
Well by now you should know that nothing gets published on this site without documentation, and yes, as usual I have that documentation. Read on and you will find out how I know that the Jeep type vehicle existed when Wilbert Coffin returned to the forest with Richard Lindsey. You will also see that it was Captain Matte and Seargeant J C Vanhoutte, the leaders of the investigative crew, who forgot to cover their tracks by leaving their notes lying around for that nosy Mr. Stoddard to find some fifty years later.
.
You see, back in the 50's the art of communications had not been refined to the extent that we do things today. There was no e-mail or text messaging, and telephone and telegraph service was very limited at best because it was dependent upon available service. Thus, the old fashioned way by surface mail offered few options. Hence, the term "paper trail" took on new meaning.
.
In my files, I am in possession of a ton of these little gems from various paper trails pertaining to the Coffin affair. Some of them simply got turfed, but I must reiterate, many qualify for publication on my site simply because they can be authenticated. As an example, I speak specifically of letters and notes written and signed by senior police officers to each other, and in some cases the correspondence advanced all the way to the top. In this affair one step had been removed. That stepping stone had been the office of the Attorney General, because as we know, the guy at the top was Maurice Duplessis as he had appointed himself Attorney General to compliment his position as premier, not to mention the ease that the appointment would carry in one's quest to stick handle around legal obstacles.
.
It was pointed out to me a few days ago that a particular blog on the internet appears to be attempting to re-invent the wheel by re-writing history with reference to Jeeps in the Coffin affair. I can tell you, Jeeps really have no relevance to the overall outcome of this affair. In a twisted way, Jeeps were made out to be a major factor. In my view, this was done by the police and judiciary in an effort to display Wilbert Coffin as a liar, because if the jury could be convinced that Wilbert Coffin was prevaricating in this aspect, it would be much easier to convince them later on in the trial on other matters pertaining to Mr. Coffin.
.
It is important that you understand this hearing was not a trial for Wilbert Coffin. At the time of the Brossard commission, Wilbert Coffin had already been hanged some eight or nine years previously. The Brossard commission was assembled by the government of Quebec to investigate alleged wrong doing by the police and justice officials during the Coffin affair as spelled out mainly in the writings of Jacques Hebert.
.
As my attention was once again drawn to this site by an e-mail from a commenter, it is not difficult to understand the confusion generated there. There is room for speculation that many folks could be inclined to accept what is written on this site was the evidence produced at trial to convict Wilbert Coffin, when in fact, much of what was contained in the Brossard commission was stuff that was never brought up at trial. Some material that had been submitted as evidence for the trial never made it to the court room. In some cases though, certain statements from that same evidence were taken out of context and presented at the Brossard commission.
.
As mentioned earlier on in this posting, I have many notes, statements, and letters from various levels of the judiciary of Quebec pertaining to the Coffin affair. I also mentioned that some of these letters etc. do not always agree with what was accepted and used as evidence during the trial. These are the areas that cause me much concern and interest. It is at this point of time that I simply ask "Why?" Immediately a flag goes up. If there was only one example, I could understand "why." When there are many, instantly one speculates and asks oneself if someone was trying to thwart the direction of justice. But then, justice officials of Quebec of that era would never do that. . . . . would they?
.
Even though I have published some of these in the past, there will be those who have not had the opportunity to peruse them. My current plan is to publish one or two of them every few days so that you may see for yourself the up hill battle that was waged against Wilbert Coffin. Perhaps then it will become clear as to why I have embarked upon a systematic study and investigation of the "Regina vs Coffin" case.
.
The following is an exerpt from a note snt by Henri Charland, a justice ministry officer to his bosses that would go all the way up the ladder to the attorney general, but in this case the attornry general was also Premier Maurice Duplessis. I feel that it is necessary to show you this so that you have a graphic example of some of the things that went on during this period. I have highlighted the letter in colour, making it easier to follow. My comments immediately follow the letter.

.
.

SÛRETÉ PROVINCIALE DE QUEBEC.

.
.
Quebec,
.
21 July 1953.
.
DQ-74890-53.
.
.
NOTE FOR THE FILE.
.
.Eugene H. Lindsay, his son Richard Lindsay, and Fred Claar (Hollidaysburg, Pa.) Gaspé, City and District of Gaspé, P.Q.
.
“Disappearance".
.
.
After several phone calls and following information that was furnished to me by the APGSC, it would seem that about the 11th June, another group of Americans likely coming from the same place as Lindsay, reportedly would have met the party of three to which we are presently referring, and Sergeant Doyon must double check (verify) this information, and, further more, Wilbert Coffin reportedly spoke of this to Doyon, and they went, as well, in the woods where one of the bodies was found, in order to provide him with details.
.
.
RC/AG ( HENRI CHARLAND).
.
.
DIRECTEUR ADJOINT SUPPLEANT.
.
Copies/rl.
.
Quebec4-9-53.
.
This letter is most important because Wilbert Coffin had declared that he had seen a Jeep type vehicle with the Lindsey party when he returned young Richard to the forest from acquiring the replacement fuel pump for their truck. The police spared him no mercy by insisting he was a liar and that the vehicle never existed, and that was also the story that the prosecution took to court to tell the jury. That story is still be told fifty-two years later as Mr. Fortin makes reference several times on his site that Wilbert Coffin "pretended" to have seen this vehicle. You will notice in the letter that I just published above, the police were very much aware that the vehicle existed, and yet they chose to lie to help gain a conviction.
.
In my next posting we shall put the Jeeps back in the toy box. I will furnish at that time another police report about a specific Jeep and it's occupants. Thank you for reading my site today. Many hours have been put in by Lani Mitchell and myself to make it possible to present this story and case to you. Thankfully, it is now all coming together and I think you shall agree within a very short period of time. Once again, Thanks and God Bless You One And All.
.
Lew Stoddard.
.
Host of "Stoddard Online"

9 comments:

Graham McLean said...

Great posting Mr. Stoddard. Excellent sample of your work. Keep it coming.

Graham McLean
Halifax

Dave Edgar said...

This is the stuff that I like to see because it makes me certain in my mind that an innocent man died for that crime, and we always felt he was innocent for the past 50 years. You and Lana have done a mountain of work on this and deserve a lot of praise.

Dave Edgar
Ottawa

S Deighton said...

Not sure where you got hold of all this stuff but congrats to you for a job well done.

S Deighton
Toronto

Joyce said...

Mr. Stoddard,

As usual a very good and sensible posting. I admire the quality of your work as I have told you many times.

You always make a very valid point when you point out that Canadians should be made aware of various happenings in this and other matters, especially when it involves the judiciary in any jurisdiction across the country.

Keep up the good work, and as the old saying goes, "keep the pressure on."

Joyce
Bristol, New Brunswick

Edna Vale said...

An excellent point that you brought forward regarding the Jeep in the forest and to think your info comes from the very people who were calling Wilbert Coffin a liar, the police themselves. This looks good on them, hope you have lots more examples.

Edna Vale
Toronto

Lew Stoddard, Host of "Stoddard Online" said...

Hi Edna,

Thanks for your comment. Just to let you know in advance Edna, I have some interesting reading material coming right up compliments of the Quebec Provincial Police from days of yore.

Lew Stoddard
Host Of "Stoddard Online"

Grace Wells said...

Lew Stoddard I found it humorous in your last posting where you referred to putting the Jeeps back in the toy box.

I will say though that your content matter in that post was very much to the point. It points out right away who the twisters of the truth really was. They seem to have lost sight of that fact on this Mr Fortin's site that you refer to.

Both Mr Fortin and his helper are always referring to the fact that the judiciary was honourable back in the 1950's.

Grace Wells
Moncton

Barb Field said...

I took the time to review your complete site on the Coffin affair this past weekend.I made the decision to do that after having been reading this fellow Fortin for the past few weeks.

I will further add that I did the revue of your site on the recommendation of another person.

You document your material well, you display many examples of that. You are articulate, and your overall coverage is presented in a most credible way.

From your story from beginning to end, and taking into account all your supporting evidence, I am convinced the untold story of this Wilbert Coffin case was never examined objectively in a court of law as you claim, if in fact it was ever examined at all.

I apologize for taking so much of your space, but I thank you for being able to express my opinion. At the onset I knew little of this case and I come to you today as one who has studied journalism and soon to receive my degree in criminology.

Barb Field
Edmonton

Bob Cameron said...

Good posting Lew. Kinda puts the arrow in the bulls-eye, right dead centre where it belongs. Proves beyond any doubt that the police were not above telling a few lies in this case. Steer her straight and keep her rollin my friend.
Bob Cameron in Winnipeg