|
|
||
Download Flash Player to view this content. A Question of Innocence
When the paramedics arrived on the scene in the summer of 1995, they found Ludmila Ilina sitting on the front steps of her Winnipeg house, her husband's body lying on the driveway in a pool of blood. She told investigators she woke up early that morning to prepare for a business trip. After going to her husband's bedroom and finding his bed undisturbed, she noticed the front door was unlocked. Outside she discovered her husband's bloodied body. He'd been brutally beaten, bludgeoned, dragged outside and left to die with his bicycle on top of him. This is the story she steadfastly stuck to through 16 hours of intense police interrogation. A brutal crime with one obvious suspect, but did she do it? The police were convinced she did, and charged her with second degree murder. It's been 15 years, and Ilina is still protesting her innocence. Now she may be on the verge of getting her case looked at again.Sent to prison for life on the strength of circumstantial and forensic evidence, she's exhausted every avenue of appeal. She has one last and final hope — The Innocence Project — a York University Osgoode Hall law program dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted criminals. Her fate now lies in the hands to two young second-year law students. Students Alex Melfi and Ziba Heydarian and well-known law professor Alan Young join forces to test the evidence that convicted a 54-year-old, slightly built intellectual, with no history of violence, of battering her husband to death. It's a long shot, but if they can prove the case against Ilina is flawed, they can appeal her conviction to the Government of Canada. Perhaps the same evidence that convicted Ludmila Ilina could now free her. In "A Question of Innocence," the fifth estate's Linden MacIntyre takes a closer look at the case of Ludmila Ilina and the Osgoode Hall team tackling her case in an engrossing examination of how evidence can be used to both convict and acquit. |
Connect with the fifth estate
Watch Full Episodes
 Linden MacIntyre joined the fifth estate as co-host for the 1990-91 season. He is one of Canada's most distinguished... Read more Connect with the fifth estate
 Linden MacIntyre takes a closer look at the case of Ludmila Ilina and the Osgoode Hall team tackling her case in an engrossing examination of how evidence can be used to both convict and acquit.
 In a particularly personal broadcast, the fifth estate's Bob McKeown traces the career of, and his friendship with, the always fascinating, charismatic, and confounding Stephen Reid.
 The Summit from the street: exclusive eyewitness video exposes a G20 you've never seen before.
 It's a moment few Canadians will ever forget: the death of a 21-year-old Georgian luger during a Winter Olympics training run. It was ruled driver error. Now, we have shocking new revelations some don't want you to hear.
 Bob McKeown's investigation into Nadia Kajouji's tragic death led the fifth estate on an international hunt for an Internet predator. McKeown now returns to Nadia's story as a "Cyberpath" is about to face justice in a precedent-setting case.
 Were they murdered? Abducted? Or are they living new lives? Reporters Linden MacIntyre, Hana Gartner and Gillian Findlay track the trails of three Canadians who disappeared without a trace.
 Will one young man's courageous decision to come out affect a sport that is so secretive about sexuality.
 More than a decade after the murder of Fatima Kama, a suspect is finally arrested. But is the case really closed?
 Hana Gartner takes a closer look at the death of Ashley Smith, and
reveals exclusive video footage Corrections Canada didn't want Canadians
to see.
 Who really killed Abdinasir Dirie? One Somali family's story of tragedy and broken hopes.
 He had it all and lost it. Now there is a whole new chapter in the life story of
Theo Fleury.
 Inside the interrogation of Russell Williams. On a commercial-free special edition, Bob McKeown decodes one of the most shocking confessions ever seen by Canadians, with the help of those who know the art of interrogation best.
 Why did the Canadian government, in the era of the Cold War, approve a plan to round up thousands of law-abiding citizens and lock them away because they were perceived to be a threat to democracy? Linden MacIntyre investigates the secret plan.
 Why did Mark Harshbarger end up dead on a family hunting trip to Newfoundland?
 Linden MacIntyre's personal essay on how the cycle of sexual abuse that plagued small communities in Nova Scotia years ago continues to haunt them today -- in new and unexpected ways.
 The shocking case of Colonel Russell Williams. This unbelievable story
has captured the country's attention, leaving people to wonder: What
really happened? Who is the man behind the headlines?
 |
90
When they say that the husband had fought back- ie clawing, was there no skin or anything under his fingernails? And I'm just wondering if the clothes that were his in the washer, and they were the ones that he had been wearing that night, what had he changed into, and was there any blood in his closet etc? Perhaps this was a load from earlier that he had just neglected to finish? The balaclava and gloves mentioned definitely seem strange, though. The problem with looking back at something like this is that the smallest things can either be completely unrelated and therefore skew the picture, or can be overlooked or looked at the wrong way. Very complicated.
Seems the conviction was based solely on the blood spread around everywhere, and the assumption that the wife was the only one available to spread this blood around. I'm not sure why or how that would override the actual death of the husband. She's a small woman, and it was indicated that her husband fought back, enough so that his knuckles were split (so the images would suggest) That either suggests either she had super healing powers, or her husband was not punching or clawing her. One would think that would be enough to get her off the hook for the murder. Additionally what was the motive?
Additionally, it's not too unreasonable to think of this scenario: A robber breaks into the house as in the middle of taking things and the husband returns home and they fight which leads to the husband being beaten to death. The robber sets into a panic after the adrenaline wears off and realizes that he just killed a man, so for a few minutes he attempts to clean up and dispose of the corpse. After those few minutes he decides that he can't possibly clean up everything. The robber sees the bike in the basement as he thinks about using the washer to clean up of some of the evidence, and places it on top of the corpse in an effort to make it appear that the husband fell off the bike and died. Afterwards he flees the scene taking the murder weapon with him. This would cover the weapon not being found, the existence of the other set of bloodied footprints, and why blood was spread throughout the house as well as why there was a very poor effort at disposing evidence. This would have been the actions of a robber who committed manslaughter and in a few minutes of panic attempted to cover up his crime before fleeing. All the evidence in and around the house indicates someone was thinking in a state of panic, but the wife doesn't exactly seem to exhibit that kind of mentality; when she was being interviewed by the police she was in complete control of her facilities. So that aspect of it doesn't match up either.
you forgot the most important word "reasonable" doubt!
Come on people..how naive can you be? This is another OJ. People not opening their eyes to what is in front of them. She is obviously guilty!
Yes, what is with that? Such a silly statement, Eve! Please retract it if you are Ludmila's friend. It does her no favours.
Apart from that, I wanted to add that there might be several layers to this event. Accident; punks seeing the accident; connecting the address to the victim; sensing an opportunity to rob him and coming back later (which happened to be after the washing machine was loaded to wash blood from falling off bike etc... ) Remember the lid was up in loading mode and the wash cycle never started.
As I said previously, ours is not to guess what happened. I only point out that other possibilities exist in everything and that to accuse someone of murder the evidence has to speak. If it doesn't, then the police must wait for further clues or tips. This did not happen here. This case has to be made right.
Ludmila Ilina was a DOCTOR? Oh well, that settles it. A highly trained professional like a doctor could never have committed such a heinous act. Only those who never reached college turn out to be criminals, right? I guess that leaves all the crooked politicians off the hook. Lawyers, scientists, accountants, engineers, and the like, can all breathe easy now too. No one can ever accuse them of committing a crime like this. Perhaps attorneys can start using this as a defence, as long as their client has a diploma hanging on the wall.
This is what I think happened.
First of all let me say that there was no murder here. This was simply an unfortunate accident.
Ludmilla was asleep when all of this happened.
Her hushand was very drunk that night and as he arrived to the house on her bike he fell and severely injured himself by hitting his head on a hard surface perhaps severing an artery. He got up and once in the house noticed that there was blood on some of his clothes so he took them off and put them in the washing machine along with some other stuff. By then he was bleeding heavily and there was blood everywhere. Since his wife's bike may have been damaged by the fall, he went to get his own bike and brought it outside for use the next day. At this point he passed out from loss of blood, he fell and the bike fell on top of him, shortly after that he died.
Because of the massive amount of blood that was present everywhere, everyone assumes that this was a homicide.
The police wanted a suspect and the obvious choice was Ludmilla since there was no evidence of anyone else.
These are good people, both dedicated to their work.
There is no motive here, no affairs, no financial problems. How can a jury convict this woman is beyond me.
There has to be a review of this case and if it turns out that I am right, exonerate this woman and issue a public apology.
I suggest that anyone posting here not say what their feelings are on Ilina's innocence or guilt. It's not about her or us but rather, the evidence of the EVENT. This is not a vote issue or survey (unless it's to measure the level of general Canadian intellect, lazy trust and compliance).
Trials are about evidence. Physical evidence, as if it were pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. One cannot do a jigsaw puzzle by looking at the box and "feeling" the result. Evidence is about hard work and about people who are paid, doing their darn jobs.
Why on earth were we shown so many scenes of that male student eating? Is legal work all about eating on the run because police and lawyers are glamorous heroes with no time for themselves? I think not!
The evidence needs to be looked at here. It cries out to be examined with skill and objectivity.
Start with motive, means and opportunity.
I believe she is innocent, but I am perplexed by her putting his body "in the trunk" of her car??? Still, I certainly believe the case had reasonable doubt. Group think may have swayed jury members whose perception lacked strong challenge from defence.
With Ludmila's case, I am familiar with that type of violence. It has been my observation, that since 1985, with the brutal, brutal death of an elderly relative, that home invasions have become extremely violent, particulary towards seniors. My theory is that drugs have changed things, causing some individuals to become extremely violent for no apparent reason. On a further note, it is possible that Ludmila's husband, if tipsy on his bicycle, veered in front of a driver (possibly a drug user). That driver became enraged, followed him home, beat him to death and then tried to cover it up as a robbery. On a final note, regarding the matter of my elderly relative that died brutally, the attacker (who was involved with drugs) was acquitted (he did have in his possession some of her belongings). Go figure.
This is in response to anyone criticizing the Fifth Estate for not having a "picture perfect ending"...
That is the WHOLE POINT. This case is a beautiful illustration of how the legal system is not black and white. Project Innocence is a valiant effort to demonstrate how fuzzy the boundary of law is. That is the sad truth... and unfortunately many people get caught in that fuzzy boundary.
So many people comment here with opinions, and speak as if they are experts in the legal process. Yet most people only understand law from shows such as "Law and Order" and "CSI". Very rarely are cases as cut and dry as TV and/or novels make you believe. People, you must learn to think critically and understand that the world does not live in a TV show where DNA evidence will unequivocally determine one's role in a crime.
Dr. Llina's case appears to be a tragic one. My best wishes to her and her loved ones, and I hope that she is exonerated of her crimes, if that is truly what she deserves. But to those who criticize the CBC for not reporting her final story, appreciate the fact that they are reporting an unbiased documentary on the Canadian legal process. If you want a biased story, might I suggest watching Fox News.
I guess the poor old lady was watching soap operas when her bleeding husband came in to wash some garbage bags, a balaclava!!!!! and rubber gloves. Just the sort of stuff a guy would use at work as an academic. I hate it when that happens!!! Gak!
How incompetent were the investigators on this case? No blood on her or her clothes, when it should have been all over her. No warning she doesn't have to talk to them, when she's already clearly become a suspect. No questioning of whether the clothes & gloves found even fit her. No questioning of the extraordinary violence involved, when women are much more likely to poison someone than beat someone to death. It's obvious the cops, yet again, got tunnel vision, fixated on the easy suspect & stopped looking, &, yet again, convicted an innocent person.
And how incompetent was her defense NOT TO RAISE THESE ISSUES?
"This "Innocence Project" is a joke." Obviously somebody who doesn't know how many innocent people get convicted every year. The system has numerous flaws & those involved in it have no incentive at all to fix it, because that requires they admit they got it wrong.
Me too! I am dying to know what happens!
Thank you for telling this amazing story.
Unfortunately Winnipeg has a poor track record when it comes to convicted murderers so saying anything definitively is foolhardy.
I wonder how much effort went into investigating whether Ms. Llina arranged the murder of her husband. It makes far more sense than the leaps it takes to explain away some evidence of large footprints a scuffle not reflected on her anatomy and having her cart his body around or relying on shaky comments like adrenalin could account for her strength.
As for motive - what is said, and done, between married couples is often not only private but far different than what anyone outside of it might suspect. Domestic Violence often eventually is discovered after an offense has been committed.
Many of us are waiting for CBC to post the rest of the story. Please do not disappoint us.
Ludmila IIina is a Fallen Angel - A gory sight wherein Ludmila Ilina sitting on the front steps of her Winnipeg house with her husband's body lying on the driveway in a pool of blood.
You hit several nails very accurately on their heads in Crown v. Ilina.
This woman was convicted twice, without ANY forensic evidence to connect her with her husband's body or the crime scene.
In court, Winnipeg police failed to produce such evidence.
On appeal, the Crown fantasized a scenario -- without any basis in forensics -- that the mysterious intruder's bloody runners were in fact worn by the accused who wrapped them in newspaper, disposed of them and the murder weapon in the nearby river -- and then returned home to machine-wash the newspaper with other clothing!
This ludicrous scenario, sadly, went unchallenged by her defense lawyer (who neverthless remains convinced she would win her case on appeal.)
He could have reminded the jury that the only newspaper found in the washing was a very small scrap from a Polish publication.
And this evidence most likely came from the deceased's trouser pockets after HE washed his pants earlier on the night of his murder.
David May
Ilina Is Innocent campaign
We are unable to connect with this site.
Can you please confirm the link is correct and freely accessible to all?
David May
Ilina Is Innocent campaign
for Ilina Innocent campaign
I must unfortunately and strongly disagree with your comment.
It is never folly, nor stupidity to question and investigate potential mistakes in the legal system. While defense lawyers may not be experts in forensic fields, neither is the Crown, and the Crown prosecutors. If you had paid careful attention to the show, you would have heard that the defense team could not afford to hire forensic experts of their own, and no prosecution will ever put an expert on the stand who may deliver damage to their case upon cross examination. Jury trials are notorious for failing to understand the significance of forensic evidence, and the failings of said evidence.
Common sense can tell you absolutely nothing about murder, a killing, or the state of a person committing said murder. Common sense is irrelevant to a legal case, and is at most hearsay, which can never be used as a deciding factor in guilt. Her "supposed" mental state, or what she "could have done" while enraged are not facts, and it must be facts that convict, not "feelings"
Innocence Project and many organizations here and elsewhere in the world are responsible for overturning wrongful convictions, rescuing the innocent from prison and even from "Death Row" on an almost monthly basis. Without them, many innocent people would still be suffering under the weight of false conviction.
Perhaps it is not the vision of these students and their professor that is blurred, perhaps it is your vision that should be evaluated. Re-evaluation and examination of the legal system is something that is a favor to all of our society, and these students should be lauded for their efforts
"...Beyond a shadow of a doubt." If there is a shadow, you do not convict. It may be a legal right to be tried by a jury of your peers, yet it seems to be a source of many problems and wrong convictions.
Too many times it is found out after 15-20 years that someone who was guilty of a horrendous crime is in reality just an innocent victim.
I hope that CBC posts an epilogue to this story. I would like to know what happens as a result of the hard work of the law students. Although there is not enough time in a short tv program to present all the facts, there do seem to be many unanswered questions.
You can read the case here http://www.canlii.org/en/mb/mbca/doc/2003/2003mbca20/2003mbca20.html
Fifth Estate seems to be on trial in many of the preceding posts.
Looking at the evidence, its critics do have a case.
The program opens with a you-are-there walk through the crime scence and voiceover: you are with the police arriving at the murder scene.
Program creators however abandon the forensic detective to create a back story -- the Innocence Project, its prof and dedicated students -- which now takes over from the central issue: did Dr. Ludmila Ilina, a brilliant academic of impeccable credentials who lost her life partner, her international academic career, the security of her home and her freedom as aa Canadian citizen actually commit a savagely brutal murder then sit on her doorstep awaiting a response to her 911 call?
Fingerprinting -- long before DNA analysis -- has been a standard means of identifying the criminal. SO WHERE ARE THIS WOMAN'S FINGERPRINTS?
If Winnipeg detectives took them, why is there no discussion of prints taken at the crime scene?
Why is does this basic police practice go unremarked by Fifth Estate's investigation?
If Winnipeg detectives were so absolutely convinced they had their killer (despite lack of motive, weapon or blood or DNA evidence to back them up) why does their one spokesperson -- the now-retired detective whose hunch turned Ludmila Ilina from grieving widow to prime suspect in a matter of hours -- get such an unchallenged walk-on part?
Sixteen years have elapsed; the woman convicted is now almost 72 and lives under a limited degree of pre-parole freedom due to her exemplary behaviour throughout a decade in Canada's dark world of penal correction.
She works as a self-trained artist, making hundreds of quilts for auction, with proceeds going to local, national and international charitable organizations. She maintains her innocence as she always has done.
Fifth Estate: journalistic objectivity is a human delusion. Time to climb down into the darker world of police hunches, missing evidence, ambitious prosecutors and young judges on the rise.
Time to see this case for what Canada's system has made of it.
Why is the same commercial playing over and over again in this documentary? It's very loud and quite annoying.
For such serious cases, one needs seasoned, open-minded investigators to go over the whole case thoroughly. How many people have been wrongfully convicted because their actions were not "normal" or did not meet the investigators' views on acceptable behaviour in the face of certain circumstances, or because they belonged to another culture and their actions were not understood? On the other hand, some people are masters at camouflage. One needs experienced investigators who will start from scratch, take a new, cold hard look at every minute detail of this case. Terri
I have a theory which totally absolve this woman.Someone followed her husband home,beat him and stole his wallet just outside his home.He saw the robber runaway and went into the house,put the bloody clothes in the machine and took Valium thinking he can report it in the morning as his head hurt. But the tall and stupid man came back to get the car,the husband surprised him and the robber finished the job inside the home(maybe with a gun or tire iron) and threw his balaclava in the machine on his way out because he was going to drive the car.This stupid man tried to put the bicycles in the trunk of the car but they did not fit and/or then he saw the husband who survived the attack coming towards him and ran away, throwing the bike on top of him. How could a woman who killed her husband in cold blood not have the presence of mind to hide her crime as she was naturally a methodical person as the attacker had to be tall for the blood to reach the ceiling instead of splattering horizontally(because of her small stature) had she been hitting him while he was fighting with her. What about the footprints and neighbours?someone knows something but afraid to tell maybe...)how can so many innocent people be accused of crimes they had nothing to do with and the perpetrators go free....eventhough she looks guilty, the crime scene does not support the story of a woman who snapped and then panicked and then lost her mind halfway through the cleaning up process...rather, it tells the story of a big man who brutally attacked her husband, and stupidly came back to the house realizing that the man may have had more money or valuables since he found a substantial amount of cash in the wallet....
This case would not be so complicated if it would be based on a clear evidence against Ludmila Ilina. Where they are? What is the base for her conviction, except "imaginative scenario" of police officer?
I am so thankful that we have resources such as The Fifth Estate, Professor Alan Young and The Innocent's Project to correct the errors in our judicial system. Ludmila's conviction is certainly not the first questionable case, and will not be the last. By the persistance of people who listen and care enough to take action, you can bring about long term changes in our legal system, and most of all provide hope to the wrongfully convicted.
I commend everyone involved on your continued efforts, and eagerly await the outcome of "A Question of Innocence" via an appeal trial. You are an encourageent to us all.
CBC really needs to fix these volume levels. I don't know if its intentional or what but the commercials are way louder than the material.
The irony is that because they're so much louder when they come on my attention is directly solely at turning the volume down - to the extent that I don't even notice the audible content as it's now muted.
Exactly my sentiment, it's poor reporting. The Osgoode Hall save-the-innocent program is lame and shows viewers that CBC's interest lies with your ratings and not with helping this victim.
You have the power to dig deeper and uncover truths. I'm sure Ludmila had realistic hopes when you contacted her and I can't begin to imagine how she feels today. Was it all just to make a t.v. show? Was there any intention of helping this victim of the justice system?
And to Fay, you should read some of the comments the many viewers have posted. It will easily answer your motives and bike question. Also, if you think our justice system is good at what it does, you have not been well informed. There are countless documented incidents of the justice system doing it's job very poorly and convicting innocent people.
How can you dismiss the forensic evidence. If Ludmila was in cahoots with someone else don't you think she would have squealed by now. She's a scientist, if she wanted to kill her husband, she would have done it with precision, not sloppily and just before her cab arrives for a flight.
CBC needs to gather the evidence at whatever cost, to prove her innocence to get my vote of confidence back. You then need to do a follow up program and boast about it. That's what we want to see, the bad guys getting it, not the good ones. Just like that criminal coroner that helped put so many innocent people away because of his negligence. We got him, now it's time to get Ludmila's.
The arguments presented in the last observation appear to be very logical.
The logic of this arguments could have been easily substantiated by a routine investigative work - with use of a standard finger and footprints technique and a detective analysis.
Unfortunately, it is not the case.
The result is well known - destroyed life of the innocent person.
I was hoping that the 5th Estate would be able to do it's own investigation of numerous inaccuracies in the detective work of professionals, and by collecting the new evidence of such inaccuracies - would be able to arrive at the logical conclusion that Dr. Ilina is, indeed, innocent.
Unfortunately, this is also not the case.
So, what is the objective of this reporting?
Agreed, Fifth Estate has an investigative record second to none in Canada.
Our justice system, also, is better than many, worldwide -- but has also had more than one Truscott.
On this fatal night, Ted M had borrowed his wife's bike. His new mountain bike was in for repair. Someone at the party had joked about Ted riding a girl's bike. He was a macho type of guy.
Hence his decision to go downstairs, unwrap his old bike, reinflate the tires and haul it outside to be ready for his ride to work on campus the next day.
Your analysis of contempt as the reason for the bike lying on top of Ted is also right on.
But professional blood analysis shows Ted's blood had also dripped down onto the bike.
For this, he had to be bleeding while standing (or seated) ON the bike.
Ted's old bike represents either an attempted escape vehicle from his assailants, or a last-ditch shield against their murderous frenzy.
As for the intruder's identity: well, you see an old man wobbling on a bike on a late summer night, a little worse the wear from drink. You follow this potentially soft touch home and ... the rest lies in those strange, bloody footprints around his body and the money and jewellery that went missing -- but uninvestigated -- by Winnipeg detectives, convinced that when they arrived on the scene the killer was sitting there on her doorstep.
Your show is one of the best on the air because of its ability to bring things to light.... I will not be surprised if there is no one out there who committed this murder... I really like to believe our justice system is good at what it does althought sure there have been wrongful convictions... this does not look to me like one of them... Ludmila is not innocent no matter how you slice it... if there is another party involved it was somebody she knows... nothing more ---the biggest bell is the old bike brought out of the basement!! Hello that is a blatent statement of here is your bike---i won't have you using mine... and hers being parked perfectly while his old rusted bike from the basement is lying on his dead body... come on What intruder and what motive---none and none
Dear Fifth Estate,
I really love your show. You do an incredible job at getting at the facts, and giving some sort of resolve to us viewers. However this episode leaves to be desired in many ways.
The ending is the most disturbing part of the show. That professor and the student program seem genuine but it's completely unrealistic to give viewers hope that these two students and one smiley professor could possibly contribute anything substantial to solve this case.
Shame on you for saying, and I'm quoting your copy "Osgoode Hall team tackling her case in an engrossing examination". What is engrossing about sending blood results off to a DNA lab? The students and that segment had nothing worthwhile to offer except empty hopes and you make it sound like they were shaking the foundations. Shame on you Osgoode Hall & professor for acting like you knew enough to make a difference. You just wanted your 15 minutes of fame.
I am surprised that with a big name like CBC, you can't find or fund your own people to investigate this story further like it deserves to be. You have left us hanging with the thought that this could happen to any one of us who so happen to get caught up in the ignorance and stupidity of a police force detective and potentially biased jurors.
Her lawyer didn't explain any of the reasons why the case was lost twice or any other details. Why weren't so many pertinent questions asked by CBC? Like the possible motive, and why kill him when her cab's arriving shortly for a trip abroad, and who's bloody footprints were those on the driveway, etc?
Shame on you for leaving us hanging with so many unanswered questions to such an awful outcome to this case. The show has left me feeling fear for law enforcement and the justice system, and skepticism for media reporting.
Oh my goodness the evidence points to we have a bi polar personality here and Ludlina doesn't even realize it and has forgotten all about that furious resentful individual who killed her own husband because she clicked into nothing in her psyche once it was done.... the old bike in the basement that was pulled out was the tell tale heart almost" use your own bike not mine to go riding about" sad state of affairs all the way around.
My gut is telling me that a stranger(s) saw the victim weaving home on his bike, obviously intoxicated, and jumped the victim as he entered the home. The stranger(s) were on drugs which would explain all the weird things they did like put the old bike from the basement on top of the victim's body, and putting garbage bags in the washing machine. I think Ludmilla was sleeping deeply b/c of the Valium she said she took. Her actions after the police arrived do not seem that odd to me. She had taken Valium the night before, and could have been in deep shock. Plus folks, this was the Winnipeg police...hello? ... Anyways this is my theory. Much stranger things have happened.
The Fifth Estate did not show full interview of Ludmila. I would like to see more of the interview when the Fifth Estate continue Ludmila case and hope Ludmila will be innocent and lives her old age free.
There is so much evidence that this case was quickly solved by pointing a finger at an innocent woman.
Ludmila was accused of dragging the body out of the house on stapled garbage bags. How could Ludmila have moved her husband onto garbage bags without leaving behind signs of this difficult manoeuvre on the carpet? There were no signs of drag marks on the carpet - no evidence of disturbed carpet fibres!
If the body was in a pool of blood in the driveway, wouldn't it show that the initial struggle was in the house, yet the completion of the murder was outside. Did Ted actually leave the house on his own two feet - possibly chasing after the intruders?
Who did the bloody footprints belong to?
If DNA determined there were other male(s) at the scene, how could this be overlooked?
So many questions have been asked in the various posted comments. If The Fifth Estate broadcast remained unbiased, yet people believe in the innocence of Ludmila, how could she have been convicted?
Ludmila's life has been destroyed, and one or two murders may be running free. May Ludmila ge freed from the confines of conviction and regain the respectful life she deserves!
Here is a scenario,is it possible that the victim knew his attacker,somebody else other than his wife,if you look at it in that direction it seems to make more sense.
Ludmila has been known to me for about three years. I am the parish priest of the Orthodox church of St. Gregory of Nyssa in Kingston where she has been coming for all the times she was in this town. Much of the evidence presented, I have known for years; I think ARK, CHERYL and DAVID MAY probably provide the best summaries.
I have also been a monk (and lately hermit) for 33 years. Our `specialty` (if you will) as monks is to fight against personal evil passions; thus we become rather knowledgable about discerning persons. Also , as confessor, I know about the effects of sin and evil in people`s lives.
Having given my `credentials` I address myself to the character of Ludmila; never did I have ANY doubt about her innnocence. Her good will, kindness, gentleness and generosity towards all of us and in particular to the children were her calling card.
I continue to pray in church for `...all civil authorities` that such travesty of justice may be rectified and not repeated.
There are just so many questions about this case that it should not be allowed to rest. This could happen to anyone in the country.
If we believe that we are safe from this kind of thing, we may end up being robbed of years of our lives!
So amateur police investigation in so high-tech and rich country like Canada? Justice based on investigation like this? Pretty scare.
My deepest respect to Dr.Young. I wish more students go through course that he tech.
Let us assume that Ludmila did it. Then, she put wallet close to Ted's body and put clothes into laundry. These two actions are psychologically incompatible. First one is cold blooded and calculated (trying to prove that it was a robbery), second one is done in the state of a hurry or panic. Laundry and cleaning up outside the house takes time, why then Ludmila did not call off taxi cab? If there were so much fight and struggle and maybe dead body moving why Ludmila's body and clothes were clean? Did she take a shower? (irony here)
Why police is accusing Ludmila? I see a conflict of interest here. Police is here to help OR try to prove that witness is a murderer? Do police officers understand that different people behave differently under stress? Do they understand how a Russian woman usually reacts? It is shock first and tears later. Again, if Ludmila did it and tried to cover up, then she would behave differently. Why Ludmila honestly told police that she tried to lift Ted's body to the trunk of the car? Lesson from all this: even if you are a witness, do not talk to police until you get a lawyer, do not assume that police will work in your interest or even care to find a real criminal. Their goal is to "solve" the case as quickly and as easily as possible. Both moral and intellectual level of the police is very low. It is easy to accuse a woman, who has no relatives in Canada, nobody who can protect her (big thank you to the lady who supported Ludmila's legal defense and other great Canadian people).
If Ludmila did it, then where is the murder weapon? Also about footprints. Did police find that person? How can the case be moved to court if police did not talk to that person first? Maybe police should work a little harder?
What was the motive for the murder?
I can not believe jury just went along with this case presented by the crown.
Thiessen and Bell played questioner and reporter, leaving the interrogation room from time to time, to compare notes and write them up. They had access to video and audio recording but did not use either. Instead, they stuck to the time-worn techniques of medieval torture: bouts of intensive examination followed by long periods of isolation to undermine theiraptive's mental integrity.
Dr. Ilina believed she was what Sgt. Gruter had told her (and any friends who tried to provide help). She was simply providing information to help solve her husband's brutal murder. She was a close witness, not a prime suspect.
Absence of an interpreter reflected badly against her (she had to request an English dictionary to confirm words used by her interrogator). Mental trauma must have impacted her reasoning ability. Lack of food, water, reading glasses or any supportive legal presence preceded her blindly signing an unread document.
Exhausted and desperate to get home, she wanted most of all to see Ted -- as a loving wife and devout Christian, she deeply needed the solace of spending time beside his body.
Her signed "statement" was declared inadmissable by the judge at her murder trial.
But Winnipeg detectives remained unmoved: they had their killer. And would make a murder charge stick, no matter how tenuous the circumstantial evidence.
A few additional observations and follow up questions for the investigators of 5th Estate:
1. The supplementary Police Report describes that after being taken from her house and the murder scene and being detained, Dr. Ilina spent more than 18 hours in the interview room and was found to be "fine" and has refused a glass of water. Unless this could be proven by a video record, such description could be challenged by any person who would be forced to spend 18 h under similar circumstances. Considering that a video recording is an accepted practice in Police investigative work, was a video recording made of the detainee?
2. The report indicates that Dr. Ilina has signed the statement about the midnight (i.e. about 16 h after being locked in the interview room). It would be beneficial to follow up on the circumstances related to the signing of the statement (did she have her reading glasses, was her legal advisor present, did she have an opportunity to read and understand the entire document?)
3. The report indicates that the victim rode the ladies' bicycle to the party in the evening of July 19th. As the bicycle was found at the murder scene, it would be beneficial to review whether this bicycle was considered as evidence, and whether it was examined for blood and footprints and for any physical damage? If this bicycle was an integral piece of the investigation, do any records of such examination exist and where is this bicycle now?
Thank you, the Fifth estate!
I have read the Supplementary Police Report by interrogators D/Sgt. R.S. Bell and D/Sgt. J. Thiessen. Now I know how to put somebody in prison for life within a few hours after that individual dialed "911".
The Report says: She spent in the interview room more than 18 hours. Sometime, she was left there alone for hours. It's hard to believe that there was no surveillance there. Was there any video camera in this room? If yes, we would be very interested to see those tapes. It would be reasonable if the police provided the Fifth estate with a video tape as a sufficient evidence of the Ludmila's physical and emotional state. Again, it's hard to believe that she was "fine" refusing a glass of water for 18 hours. What was her behavior during the interrogation? Her body language could say about guilt or innocence much more convincing (and truthful) than any written production of two interrogators. What did she do while both interrogators were out, for eating, drinking, smoking and talking? What was her state?
The Report says: She signed her "Statement" at about midnight, i.e. 16 hours since she was locked in the interview room. Has anybody provided her with optical? Has she got any legal advice of signing such crucial document? What was her physical state in a moment of signing? Was it voluntarily, or it just "appears" to officers that she was anxious to sign without reading? Could she, with her little English possibly read the lengthy hand written text within 22 minutes?
Why wouldn't the police use a tape recorder? Or maybe, officers have used both, video camera and audio recorder, but hesitate to disclose of what was really said by them and by her, what have really happened in the interview room during 18 hours?
This episode was disappointing,theres more to this story,if any thing it left more questions.
The bottom line is that there were foot prints that were not identified and that Ted had serious defensive wounds on his hands whereas Ludmila did not have any marks on her body. This alone is a reasonable doubt. This was quite clear at the first trial so when the verdict came in, it was rather shocking. As for ex-Sgt Gruter's "brilliant deduction" that he thought Ludmila was guilty when he heard her say good morning to a receiptionist, some cultures teach their people to be polite to one another and a greeting comes out naturally.
*Science, medicine, the law are embedded in culture.I was interested to read one comment on the agressive "tough on crime' culture at the time of this murder. Perception can lead us to see a vase or the profile of 2 people
*I am grateful for the solidarity offered by the Canadian woman who contributed generously to defense costs for someone so vulnerable and alone in a new country
*Ludmilla's grace under fire is a testament to the human spirit. Her intelligence is mulitfold-intellectual, emotional, spiritual
At trial, the Crown's case against Dr. Ilina stated she killed her husband as he slept on the livingroom chesterfield, then she dragged his body outside.
Now, Sgt. Gruter seems to be saying that she and Ted were involved in an adrenalin-fuelled fight, resulting in a crime of passion.
So which was it? Cold-blooded murder of a sleeping man, or a fight to the death?
The Winnipeg homicide detective's memory of this murder case is becoming seriously confused.
It is too bad that you post some comments (sometimes several from one person) and omit others altogether without explanation.
This show just raises more questions about the legal system. Notice I say "legal system" and not "justice system". I remember that the Winnipeg Police Department bragged about their high closure rates on murder cases. Pretty easy to do that when you twist and ignore the evidence!
This is one more case of the system fitting a person for a crime, while the real murderer may still be walking the streets!
This case must be looked into and all the facts brought out to the public. Please!
I watched this program, and I believe strongly that Ludmila Ilina did NOT murder her husband Ted. There is no evidence that she did, and there is a lot of evidence that points to an unknown other person (or persons).
Leave aside the DNA/blood evidence, for the sake of argument (remember, it has been in the possession of the Winnipeg police all these years, and may or may not end up providing any definitive answer). Leave aside the lack of any motive on her part. Leave aside her professional reputation, and the lack of any history of violence or wrongdoing.
Even without any of these considerations, big questions should have been more seriously addressed.
Whose body had the physical evidence of a violent fight with Ted? Not Ludmila's. Whose bloody footprints were found in the carport? Not Ludmila's nor Ted's. Whose fingernails scratched into Ted's skin, as described in the autopsy report? Not Ludmila's. Whose "dark straight hair" and "dark cloth fibers" were found in the injuries on Ted's hand and on his arm? Not Ludmila's. How is it possible to move a body using stapled garbage bags? What happened to the "blunt heavy object" referred to in the autopsy report?
HOW could the time interval between Ted's arrival home in the night and the arrival of a taxi driver at 5:30am, POSSIBLY allow for an argument escalating into a violent fight between Ludmila and Ted, a murder involving multiple blows, the moving of a body, a complete cleanup by Ludmila of every bit of physical evidence on her clothing and her person, and the disposal of anything pointing to her plus a murder weapon and the missing cash so that no shred of any of it was ever found?
Does it sound plausible that she committed this murder? Or does it seem MUCH more likely that someone else did?
To anyone who's still thinking "no smoke without a fire" or "the jury must have had their reasons for finding her guilty" or "the police never would do that" . . . DON'T KID YOURSELF.
Wrongful convictions do happen. They happen to ordinary people who probably ALL started out thinking - as Ludmila Ilina did - that it must be just a misunderstanding, that everything will be all right, that no one could possibly believe such a crazy accusation.
Just in Manitoba in the last few years alone, we have seen one wrongful conviction after another after another come to light. Thomas Sophonow, Kyle Unger, James Driskell, Frank Ostrowski. Earlier, in Manitoba, David Milgaard. Elsewhere in Canada, more. Guy Paul Morin, Donald Marshall.
EVERYTHING about Ludmila Ilina's case looks like another in this pattern. There is no evidence that she murdered her husband, and very strong indicators that point to some other unknown person.
The Fifth Estate should return to this case as quickly as possible, and ask the questions that should have been asked the first time around!
Winnipeg once held the title of Murder Capital Of Canadea. Rapid police investigations and early guilty verdicts were the perceived cure for this civic scourge.
However, there are often innocent losers in this laudable drive for law and order.
In a 1981 Winnipeg murder, key evidence held by police went missing before it could be tested for DNA comparison.
The alleged killer Thomas Sophonow was tried three times in the strangling death of a teenager and spent four years in jail.
Crucial evidence possibly implicating another male "slipped through investigators' fingers" claimed a 2002 internal Winnipeg police report. (That report remained secret until a 2005 media leak.)
In 2009 -- 19 years after the murder -- Sophonow was exonerated. The other man, a prime police suspect since 1999, committed suicide in 2005 after being forced to provide a DNA sdample.
Two subsequent reviews found no grounds for criminal or regulatory charges against Winnipeg's Chief Jack Ewatski or other, high-ranking officers. (These reviews were not publicly released.)
In 1995, Ewatski was the senior homicide detective in the Winnipeg police force when Dr. Ludmilla Ilina was charged with murder.
He is now retired.
I would like to see the end result of this story, I felt it was a cliff hanger. Ludmila didn't have to claim innocence once she was out and there were so many odd things that happened that evening which seemed to direct guilt to her. She appeared stoic regarding the death, but does that convict?
Ark's observations related to Dr. Ilina's case:
This is my second comment regarding this program.
I'd like to share with the readers Ark's tale as follows:
I was due to meet Ludmila at Vancouver International the day she was arrested for her husband's murder
Ludmila was going to travel to Vancouver for a meeting with business people interested in a computerized atlas prepared by her.
I planned to introduce her to contacts with an interest in Ludmila's specialty: sustainable development of the northern part of Canada and Russia, development of "Arctic Bridge" and geocomputerised economic mapping.
She had not arrived at the YVR and had not registered in the hotel where she was going to stay.
I left my business card at the hotel counter and asked the hotel staff to contact me should any information about Ludmila be available.
She did not make her flight; the first I knew of her arrest was when two police detectives visited me.
I understood that the Winnipeg Police found the confirmation of her booking at the Vancouver hotel, had contacted the local Police, Police contacted the hotel, and my card was given to them.
As far as I'm aware, Ludmila and her husband Ted had planned her trip together.
Ted supplied her travelling expenses, pre-arranged her cab to Winnipeg Airport the night before his murder
I knew Ted and Ludmila for since 1992, when I met Ludmila at one of the APEGM breakfast meeting, where she was making a scientific presentation to the members of the Manitoba engineering community.
They supported one another's work in different areas of geography (which was their mutual passion and the subject of their research).
As far as I could observe during our contacts, there was nothing in their marriage that would result in a crime of passion
They were a respectable and respectful couple of highly intelligent Canadians, raised in pre-war eastern Europe.
I sent my original comment yesterday, but I still can't locate this comment on the CBC website related to "A question of innocence" report.
Therefore, I'm sending another comment.
Some of the posted comments emphasise emotions related to this case.
However, aside from the emotions and personal feelings one aspect should not be overlooked: that the main criteria in the Canadian justice system is based on presumption of innocence.
Thus, it is very troubling to comprehend that the following undisputed facts have not been taken into account by the professional investigators of this case, and it is very disappointing to acknowledge that the CBC investigative report does not elaborate on these undisputed facts:
1. The victim was severely beaten with many bruises and scratches clearly visible on his body, with his fist being damaged as the result of a fight and struggle - and yet the accused Dr. Illina had no single scratch or bruise on her body (which would indicate involvement in the fight or struggle with the victim).
2. Involvement of other persons in light of the forensics identified presence of 14 foreign bloody footprints at the scene.
3. Statements from the neighbours about human noises and sounds of a car with a running engine at the scene on the night of the murder.
4. Absence of the murder weapon and persuasive motives for the murder.
5. The staff of the DNA testing laboratory in South Carolina have advised the staff of "Innocent Project" that the result of the DNA test from exhibit 7 (from the steps outside the house) have demonstrated DNA of two males.
It appears that only these undisputed facts would allow to presume innocence until the guilt is proven.
Unfortunately, this had not happened in this case.
It is also unfortunate that the enforcement agency investigating this case failed to recognize these facts and to explore other avenues in the investigation.
The result is - a human tragedy.
What parts of CBC Journalistic Practices and Standards have I breached with the most recent but unposted submissions I made this week?
I have followed your giudelines and checked terms and conditions...
Any questions I ask are to increase public understanding of the case; any comment I provide is based on documentation in the public domain.
The episode was incomplete. Ludmila did not get many chances to talk. Please continue this case.
Could it be that the Winnipeg police have something to hide and Ludmila is the victim?
Please, Fifth Estate, dig into this mystery!
I have known Ludmila for 3 years. When I first met her it hurt me to see a person suffering so intensely. She was visiting our church with a guard and so it was known she was a prisoner. Even without knowing any details of her situation I felt she was a victim rather than a criminal. As I have gotten to know Ludmila my initial feelings are supported by her amazing compassion.
She is a very gentle,generous and humble soul. Yes,some parts of the story surrounding her husband's death are strange,such as the items in the washing machine,his bicycle,her demeanor as she entered the police station,etc.. But this does not make her guilty. I hope the DNA evidence will help her struggle to be free.
Silled liars work very hard to overcome the 'shify eyed' look. Current research says liars are in fact likely to maintain MORE rather than LESS eye contact as a result. On body language tests, most of us score less than 40 per cent, trying to separate the liar from the truth-teller.
When she was being interviewed and asked about the garbage bags in the washing machine,her whole presence changed.She quit making eye contact with Linden,looking away,staring down, and it made her look like a guilty person searching for an answer......Her body language wasn't helping her at that point.
Ziba was hot. I watched just because she was working on the case.
The only useful thing this show did was shed light upon her case. I would personally love to know alot more details which honestly would have been more important to me than watching two students talk on a handi cam.
Are the forensics really that bad? I didn't hear anything about a speculation of how long he'd been dead, if any pieces of anything were found in his wounds, any interviews with friends, or even the guy the husband had been visiting that same night, or even the size of the shoes that left the prints walking off! Could be the show's fault for lack of details, but regardless. It is too far for repair, justice is an angry dog that will not let go of that bone.
My aunt's house in winnipeg was also broken into around that time. Not sure if it means anything , but food for thought. Robberies seem like such a common thing, though.
This case seems to have way too many loose ends, it is very frustrating.
You took the words right out of my mouth...
See my earlier comment on the overturned first trial. At second trial her defence lawyer was TOO confident that the 14 foreign bloody footprints at the scene would have brought 'reasonable doubt' into the mind of the jury. If only Winnipeg police detectives had gathered the kind of evidence to which your refer and judged it in a cooler light, Ted's wife would never have been arrested in the first place. Judging a book by its cover? Sounds a lot more like the still judgmental ex-Sgt Gruter and his homicide inspector boss (later promoted to Winnipeg's chief of police).
Were you aware of a halfway house for youth 'in conflict with the law' close to your home at that time?
The bloody mess? Forensic evidence showed that the big stain was not blood at all, but an 'unknown liquid' . The only true bloodstain was actually quite small. Also the bloody water in the washer is an exaggeration. Again, the only scientifically proven blood in the wash came from a scrap of Polish newspaper mixed among Ted's wet clothes. ALL the wash was HIS clothing. Where did his wife hide or wash HERS? And remember she was unmarked despite a vicious struggle in which Ted, a fit and trained man fought his assailant, who whopped him 17 times, almost slicing off an ear and resulting in a massive loss of blood, most of it outside on the carport concrete. Her first trial inciddentally was chucked out because the judge failed to adequately instruct the jury on the 'unknown intruder' alternative scenario. No weapon found. No motive to kill her husband. No marks on her body even when stripsearched at police HQ. Ted's wife was not the one who killed him. His killer is still at large.
sitting on the doorstep of her home
After reading the comment from "Bunneeboop"..I find it interesting that when I went to "Google Earth"...did a search for 132 Silverstone Ave, Winnipeg Manitoba..there is no such address, I searched from one end of the street to the other a few times..checked all the homes..nope!
Any thoughts on this ?
Apparently people are not presumed innocent until proven guilty....particularly women. Why is it that men can commit horrendous crimes - check out the murder of kimberly proctor in bc, and they admitted to torturing and abusing her, planning to kill and admitted that they did it, they get the same sentence as this woman. IF she were guilty of this crime she is more intelligent than to leave a trail of crazy evidence all over the place like this. This defies logic that the police would not be more open minded in looking for another suspect. But...look at the cops in this case....all men...it is good thing times are changing and finally there is more focus on looking at all the angles not just having tunnel vision. But then....look who ok'd clifford olson getting paid to tell where more bodies were....put him in a room with a bunch of mothers and they would have got that information out of clifford... There are a lot of mothers who would like to get their hands on guys like paul bernardo too, instead of hiding these creeps in prison and paying to keep them there....they are a waste of good air....put them in the ground and donate the money it would have continued to cost the Canadian taxpayer to house them and build some new playgrounds for kids or have more hot lunch programs.
The fifth estate is entertainment, first and foremost. Very few murder investigations could fit into 45 mintues of broadcasting.
Two trials saw two of the top lawyers in Winnipeg unsuccessfully argue her case.
Two trials allowed two juries to hear all the facts (over and above what appeared on TV) and neither found the requisite "reasonable doubt" need for an acquittal.
Appeal Courts and The Supreme Court endorsed the final finding of the jury.
Tossing out absurd theories without knowledge of the case or the full range of evidence, as some have been in this comment section, is as irresponsible as it is silly.
Prof Young did no service to his students. For them to be fully effective they need to maintain a detachment that allows objectivity while plotting a strategy. There was too much judging a book by its cover on their part. It's evidence examined in a cool, sterile light that will determine innocence or guilt.
I can't believe I fell for watching a program with a half a story.
Where was the woman when the cab arrived?
I find it really interesting that she is being blamed for a murder that so closely compares to the murder of my great Aunt. A murder that has never been solved in Winnipeg. Edith Smallpiece was murdered in the '70s. Could it be that this lady was just very fortunate to have not been killed with her husband? Is there a serial killer in Winnipeg???
"The justice system struggles to avoid mistakes. It is also famously reluctant to admit it ever made one."
No truer words spoken. The system is and has always been broken. Police and investigators need to be held to a higher standard. It is easy to piece together a plausible theory rather than search for the truth. Better a guilty person go free than an innocent person suffer.
Please note that the title is DOCTOR Ludmila Ilina, who is a distinguished geographer, cartographer, professor and researcher. I was her mentor while she served time at the Edmonton Institution for Women: we met most weeks for about 3 years and became close friends. I am convinced of her innocence - as are many frienda and supporters who find it impossible to believe that this gentle, kind and generous woman could be capable of the violence shown by the person who murderered her husband. I admire her greatly and value our friendship. Dr. Ilina has performed many acts of charity over the last 10 years, under very constrained circumstances - from donating the beautiful quilts she made while at EIFW - to her talent for nature artwork that is sold and the proceeds donated. Ludmila does not benefit in any way from these sales. She also provides the materials and designs cards that are sold to raise money for the Elizabeth Fry Society. It is my greatest hope that the Osgoode Hall law team will be able to appeal her conviction to the Government of Canada, may justice be done.
I saw the episode that night, and it was very interesting. We lived on Silverstone Ave at the time, which is within 5 min walk from where the murder happened. There were 3 break ins at our house around the same time. The first break in was in the middle of the night when we were home sleeping, and our children were small at the time and there were night lights on and a flourescent light in the kitchen. The intruder came in thru the open kitchen window as the house was warm from the day and needed to be cooled off. A fingerprint was obtained. We never heard anything since.
Just because she looks like an old lady doesn't mean she can't commit a crime. Any small incident can trigger anger, anger at her husband for taking her bike without telling her (remember his broken bike was in the basement, and was found lying on top of his body, so there, she said) it was the last straw, no one knows the real story. No burglar would have gone to the trouble of trying to clean up the bloody mess in the living room, put bloody clothes in the washer, and dragged his body outside. She is an academic, a very smart lady, who did break under pressure. I feel sorry for her because she may have been a battered wife and finally lost it, but I believe she did it.
Is it possible that the husband had a homosexual encounter that went wrong?
this man was most likely beaten by someone from the polish home he was visiting. the police look for the easy way out. he came into the house with someone, put his clothes in the washer as he had been bleeding from a fall, together they looked at the bike and the criminal carried the bike upstairs. he asked for money and a argument ensued. the old man went outside so as not to have his wife hear the commotion and so saved her life. the person who killed him knew him and felt bad, that is why the blood was wiped up. or it could have been a student from the university where he worked. it certainly was not the wife.
the fifth estate has done it again - shown society
the near impossible chance non-murder wrongful
cases will ever be examined. The police interviewed
claim when asked they will review - go over
evidence used to convict a suspect who claims to
be innocent..now 31 years Bob Wilson cannot get
one current winnipeg police to examine Ex 29,31
358/80 # 2456 Operation Enterprise....its called
the ' planted -impossible notebook use to convict
a sitting parliamentarian MLA into prison 7 years.
CBC is wrong to broadcast its take a year to be
heart CC 696.1 new trial....my application was first filed in 2007. please CBC complete your work
the public has a right to know Ottawa is flawed.
Ludmila is once again other Milgraft? And we will pay $ 20 000 000?!! Why investigators work like weather men? Thats the only job in Canada when they screw it up and no one is fired? They shell be fired as on other jobs!! We are not USA, where hundreds innocent are send to death!!!
That is a living nightmare!!! The people accusing her with 100% certainty are responsibly for her wrongfull conviction and should pay the altimate price their actions. I would give them 5 years each. So these kinds of accusations should have servere conscequences. Maybe they ' ll think twice before opening their mouths...and judge...they think their God or what? Makes me want to do something about it ! Their should be tax payer money to help innocent people like that. We need better forensic investigating with our own DNA labs...
As I'm watching this episode, I am becoming increasingly angry in seeing these clueless, ignorant law students attempt to prove a killer innocent. Their professor, Alan Young, somehow believes he knows more than investigators and experts, in relation to homicide investigations. Defense lawyers are neither experts or knowledgeable in these areas. They are trained to defend the innocent and, in most cases, the guilty, regardless of the truth.
This seemingly frail woman, who 16 years ago was much more agile and much less frail, claims that if she were to commit murder, she would do it as she did her research work, with precision. But common sense tells us that when a person kills another in a state of passion, not only does their anger and passion make them stronger and more physical resources, but also the thought of making a clean kill is not a priority.
This episode was not only disappointing, but also angled positively toward the woman who was twice found guilty.
This "Innocence Project" is a joke. Attempting to prove the guilty innocent while being biassed in favour of the guilty. I appreciate these young kids who want to become lawyers want to believe that this frail, older lady is innocent. But, as they become emotionally involved with this killer, their vision is blurred and they do nobody any favours.
The one thing the retired police officer didn't mention is that the victim was not a large man at all. He was diminutive, thin and just over 5"2" if that. She was a bit taller. So it was not a question of a small woman and a large man. The whole thing still doesn't seem right.
After watching the 5th estate, I am outraged at the lack of justice. I do not understand the actual proof that put this woman away. Surely it can't just be that she was in the house. I believe in her innocence, and hope that justice is finally done. Remember Guy Paul MOrin?
When there is a "shadow of a doubt" in such cases as Ludmila Llina's any balanced jury would as a basic principal of LAW aquit her,no matter the mindsets of enforement personel, rather than to put it into the realm of TV Entertainment.