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"

Monday, November 17, 2008

THE FACTS OF THE MATTER.
.
.
.
I am of the conviction that if a story is told and embellished enough times someone may start to believe it. In other words, the more bizzare it is, coupled with some new hype and certain people will take a stab at rewriting history. You see, many stories and events in their true form are dull and boring, so sometimes certain writers may find it necessary to "Jazz" it up a bit. I borrowed that word from my teen age niece, but I do agree with her.
.
Of course I am making reference to the Wilbert Coffin case here. More specifically, to certain elements of the case. We have seen and heard a lot about those pesky little vehicles called Jeeps in the past fifty years. You know the ones I mean, the ones that were thrown away by Crown Assets Disposal after the Second World War. You could pick them up for as little as fifty bucks at an auction, thus making them available to not just the affluent, but to the poor as well. Affectionately, they were known as the poor man's Cadillac in many circles.
.
For the sake of those seven or eight people who may read a particular site on the internet about the Wilbert Coffin affair there are a couple of things that you should remember or be made aware of before you get your knickers tied in a knot. I am speaking of the gospel according to Fortin.
.
There are several elements that sets the site to which I refer apart from what you read on "Stoddard Online." You see, and I mention this often, nothing gets published on my site unless it can be backed up with documentation. That documentation may consist of a true documented account, personal interviews with subjects involved, or a combination of both. This space has not in the past been over overrun with hearsay, is not currently, nor will it be in the future. To borrow a line from Ford Motor Company, that rule is "Job One" on this site.
.
Reference is constantly made about Wilbert Coffin's sworn statement to the police concerning the vehicle in the area of the Lindsey's when he returned young Richard to the site.. I have yet to see that sworn statement and there is a very good reason. The reason is because Wilbert Coffin did not make a sworn statement to police. Anything that Wilbert Coffin had to say to the police they most certainly would not have wanted in sworn context and the reason is very simple. The police were only interested in garnering a confession, nothing more, nothing less. What they got was Wilbert Coffin steadfast in his statement proclaiming his innocence.
.
True there were hearsay statements presented at trial about this vehicle that Wilbert Coffin saw. The one key element that was missing at the trial concerning this vehicle was the one who saw the vehicle himself, Wilbert Coffin. You will recall he wished to give evidence at trial. You will further recall that it was a dead beat defense lawyer by the name of Maher who denied him that chance, thus the hearsay evidence was accepted. Further to that, Sergeant Henri Doyon of the Quebec Provincial Police was portrayed as nothing short of a liar because he did not give evidence consistent with what the crown wanted about this vehicle.
.
Wilbert Coffin did make a sworn deposition regarding his case. This is where this other web site that I allude to is obviously confused. As several folks pointed out in my last posting, this other site is constantly monitoring my whereabouts, so once again I shall do my part and set them straight so that they may get their facts straightened out.
.
While waiting to be hanged at Bordeaux Jail in Montreal, Wilbert Coffin made a 49 point deposition. In the deposition Wilbert Coffin outlined his case to Arthur Maloney QC, touted to be one of the best criminal lawyers in Canada past and present. Also in attendance was Antonio Pilon. Wilbert Coffin decsribes in detail the vehicle that he witnessed. I am in possession of that deposition. I will share with you the following which is an exerpt from that sworn deposition:
.

22) On October 8 1955 I had an interview with my lawyers, Mr. Arthur Maloney CR of Toronto and Mr. Francois Gravel of Quebec and gave them the explanations about particular facts that they raised during the interview. I will state now these particular facts in the following paragraphs.
.
23) Mr. Maloney produced a photograph of a jeep with part of the body that was made of plywood, designed like Exhibit A in this declaration. In this declaration Mr. Maloney said that he had obtained this photograph from the Toronto Evening England that presented it as the photograph of a jeep that had been found in New Brunswick. After studying the photograph, I couldn’t judge if this was the same jeep as the one that occupied the two Americans I met with the Lindsay group. The fact that the two jeeps resemble each other, and that the two were constructed in the same way. The jeep I saw, occupied by the two Americans seemed to be constructed as though the plywood wasn’t put there by a manufacturer, but by someone with less experience in this kind of work, and it seemed to me that it was stained with some kind of oil or varnish. It could be that the jeep in the photograph marked exhibit A was the same jeep but I couldn’t swear to it.
.
Let us now refer to paragraphs 41 and 42 in the deposition;
.
41) During the time I was in the company of the police and the group of searchers in the region of the camps, I distinctly remember on the road the tracks made by a jeep. I remember seeing such tracks between camps 24 & 25, and on different places on the access road in the region. I particularly instructed Mr. Maher, my lawyer, to try and have photos taken of these tracks as I felt that they still would be visible. No one took these photos. I am now in the belief that Sergeant Doyon had said to Mr. Gravel that he also had seen the jeep tracks.
It arrives that neither the ;lawyers for the Crown nor the defense lawyers had ever poised that particular question during the trial. On the contrary, the lawyers for the Crown pretended in front of the jury that there were no jeep tracks in the region. In other words, they exploited evidence that the recent admission of Sergeant Doyon demonstrated to be a falsehood.
.
42) The lawyers of the Crown brought Dr. Burkett and Mr. Ford, who admitted being in Gaspé in a jeep but who proved they left the region June 5. In the process, they tried to imply that I wanted to throw the blame on them. Nothing could be further from the truth, because M. Burkett and Ford definitely weren’t the men I saw in the company of Lindsay June 10 1953.
.
The following represents paragraphs 47 to 49 inc.
.
47) The details given in this declaration are made to my lawyers Mr. Arthur Maloney C.R. and Mr. Francois De B. Gravel Saturday October 8. They have retained the services of a stenographer and dictated the statement I gave them after checking that I found it exact.
.
48) I repeat that I am innocent of this crime and I don’t feel I had a fair trial, mainly because the evidence concerning the other jeep and the other Americans in the district of Gaspé wasn’t produced and the evidence of the existence of the tire tracks of a jeep on the road in the vicinity of the camps wasn’t mentioned at all.
They made me out to be a liar because they proved that Dr Burkett and Mr. Ford weren’t the men that I saw when I left the Lindsay group, and new evidence now proves that another jeep and other Americans were in the district. The police reporting on my case knew that and didn’t say it.
It also is now proved by Sergeant Doyon in his deposition to my lawyer M. Francois Gravel that there were jeep tracks on the route.
.
49) I would be pleased to be given the chance to be questioned by a member of the Ministry of Justice of our Federal Government to be able to explain at length all that I’ve said here, and all that again would be necessary.
Signed in the prison of Montreal, Bordeaux, Que.
.
9 October 1955
(S) Wilbert Coffin.
.
Witnessed in front of me at the Bordeaux prison
This day of 9th October 1955
J.- Antonio Pilon
Juge de Paix, district of Montreal.
.
As you can see, what was actually a sworn deposition differs greatly as to what is touted as a sworn statement to police. Due to dirty deeds by the crown, Wilbert Coffin never got a chance to address his case. Equally important, you can easily see that statements given to the police were twisted and fabricated to bolster the crown's case.
.
In the case of the reported sightings of a vehicle by Dr. Mimi Wilson, it is particularly interesting as she is very much still alive and I have interviewed her twice. She was not called to testify at the trial because the crown chose to not advise her when the trial was on. Consequently, her evidence was never brought forward to trial. She still wants to be heard though. In Gaspe', Fabien Sinnett, also very much alive, saw a vehicle as well on the days in question. He reported it to police, but like Mrs. Wilson, was not called to testify. His testimony would have also helped Wilbert Coffin, and to this day, he is willing to testify as he does not feel that justice was served. Having had the opportunity to interview both these people, there is one statement that both parties made that is common to this case. I have purposely not reported this statement so as to not compromise their statements. As you can no doubt see, I am patiently waiting to get a look at this vehicle reported by Mrs. Wilson. It should be interesting as there are no pictures available, and yet Mr. Fortin says we will take a look at it. This is where the above held back statement will hit it's mark.
.
As you can see Wilbert Coffin did not give evidence about a bunch of gawdy colors. He merely stated that the plywood on the vehicle looked like it was covered by oil or by some sort of varnish.
.
In the case of his mother, one would not expect an elderly lady to necessairly be precise in a description. Afterall, she never said that she had seen the vehicle. She was only basing what she remembered from a conversation many months before.
.
As usual, I am looking forward to your comments. I encourage comments from all, just three basic rules, topical, no profanity, and complete with the authors name. Further I wish to thank you for such a nice cross section of Remembrance Day messages. Stay tuned as there is a big one coming up in just a few days. God Bless You, one and all. . .
.
Lew Stoddard

Monday, November 10, 2008

.

In Flanders Fields.

.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie,
In Flanders fields.
.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
.
Lieutenant Colonel John McRae.

.
This is the week in history that should be foremost and number one in the minds of all folks in the free world. I am speaking specifically of the symbolic end of armed conflict involving Canadian men and women. The eleventh hour, of the eleventh day, of the eleventh month, hence, Remembrance Day.
.
Remembrance Day was to be a day of reflection, a day to put aside the trials and tribulations of everyday life and show respect for all those who so unselfishly were there to answer the call without conscription, and travel to a far away land in an effort to do their part for all Canadians in an effort to bring successful conclusion to the threat of loss of freedom.
.
In the past few years I am troubled when I can notice a down turn in the recognition of this date. True, many of the elder men and women who took part in these conflicts are no longer with us, and their numbers are dwindling each year. That is no excuse. It simply is not. One only needs to take an example from the last verse of Colonel McRae's poem to recognize that fact. He states it well. . . "Take up our quarrel with the foe, to you from failing hands we throw, The torch be yours to hold it high, If ye break faith with those who die, we shall not sleep". . .
.
Many of us in Canada can trace our roots to an ancestor who answered the call. It is important to note that from all those who answered the call many thousands were not fortunate enough to come back home. From those who did manage to make it back to our shores, there were many whose lifes would forever be changed from physical and psychological injuries.
.
The highest award for valour in the British Commonwealth is the Victoria Cross. I have been particularly blessed by personally meeting two recipients of the Victoria Cross. Through media work I had the occasion to meet the late retired Lieutenant Colonel Cecil Merritt and the late Sergeant Ernest Alvia (Smokey) Smith. Both of these gentlemen were everyday people, just like you and I. Sergeant Smith always had time for a laugh and a joke.
.
In the case of Sergeant Smith, he was happy to oblige when young children would ask him questions about the military and the war. He knew just the way to explain it to them in language they could grasp without fright. I had the opportunity to hold his Victoria Cross medal. I have to tell you, it caused goose bumps. Suddenly one realizes the appreciation that we should hold for these gallant people as they fought the horrors of war.
.
Each November 11th, I personally make a point of visiting a military cenotaf. I encourage others to do the same. For many, it provides an opportunity for young people to cross paths with others who made a big sacrifice by fighting and standing up for the freedoms that we enjoy to this day. Freedoms and rights were not free. They came at teriffic cost. These are the things that we should all think about, these are the things that we should be impressing upon our youngsters. Upon visiting a cenotaf one very quickly learns those tears in the eyes of elderly men and women are genuine and real, especially where in many cases they are being shed by someone horribly disfigured from the rigors of war. These people are however, not lamenting on their own injuries, they are lamenting the loss of those who did not return.
.
Even though many returned military personnel had made a teriffic sacrifice in Europe and elsewhere, some were not treated very well in the years immediately following the war. One of these soldiers was from the province of Quebec. He was from the town of Gaspe' on the Gaspe' peninsula. His name was Wilbert Coffin. This is particularly significant because Wilbert Coffin came from Quebec, and the then premier of the day, Maurice Duplessis was against Quebec taking part in the war in Europe. Duplessis liked the freedoms, but he was totally against trying to win them.
.
I invite you to express your thoughts on the comments page. If there are those who thought that I had fallen off the face of the earth, I am pleased to inform that I am still here. If there are those who hoped that I had fallen off the face of the earth, I encourage you to stay tuned and pay attention.
.
Lew Stoddard
.
Photo Credit: Minister Supply and Services Canada