The Role of the Judge in Wrongful Convictions: R v Mullins-Johnson

This thesis examines the role of the judgeicial education in preventing wrongful convictions. It focuses on the case of R v Mullins-Johnson. William Mullins-Johnson was accused of killing his niece by mechanical asphyxiation during an episode of sexual assault. He was convicted of first degree murder. After twelve years in jail, he was acquitted by the Ontario Court of Appeal. Fresh expert evidence revealed that the trial Crown expert opinions were unreliable, and that the pathology evidence was inconclusive of murder. This thesis explores what went wrong at trial, by comparing trial expert testimony to appeal expert testimony. It examines the role of a judge in a trial involving expert evidence, and in particular, whether thjudicial interventioneducation could have avoided thein avoiding wrongful conviction in this cases. It also reviews some of the issues that arise in the common law adversarial system when judges specially trained to handle scientific expert evidence are prohibited from applying their knowledge at trial.LL.M