During the final day of testimony in a review of Steven Truscott's 1959 murder conviction, a renowned U.K. pathologist cast further doubt on key forensic evidence used to convict Truscott.

Bernard Knight, a retired professor and established academic who wrote one of the standard textbooks for pathologists, called into question the method chosen by forensic experts 47 years ago to determine the time of death.

Steven Truscott may have been convicted on the basis of an unreliable method to determine time of death, says a renowned pathologist.
(CP Photo)

He called stomach content analysis one of the worst methods for accurately determining time of death.

"It's so inaccurate it is hardly worth doing. There are so many errors in it that it's impossible to give an accurate time of death," Knight later said outside court.

The Ontario Court of Appeal is reviewing the murder conviction of Steven Truscott, who was 14 years old when he was sentenced to hang for the death of 12-year-old classmate Lynne Harper after a speedy two-week trial.

The sentence was later commuted to life in prison, and Truscott served nine years in prison.

Truscott case seen as 'mishap'

During the trial in 1959, a pathologist who performed the autopsy on Harper concluded after viewing the body's gastric contents that she died within two hours of her last meal.

Harper finished dinner at 5:45 p.m. on the evening of June 9. Therefore, the Crown argued, she died between 7:15 and 7:45 p.m., making Truscott the prime suspect.

In court on Friday, Knight disputed the original conclusions, saying there's no way of determining what a normal meal consists of and the length of time a stomach might take to process it.

Body temperature was suggested by Knight as one of the best methods for determining time of death, but he said that test wasn't performed in the Truscott case.

Knight told the court, in his estimation, that no accurate time can be determined for Harper's death. She could have died any time between June 9 when she was last seen and June 11 when her body was found, said Knight.

He added that the Truscott case is generally referred to as a "mishap" in the forensic pathology profession.

Three weeks of testimony wrap up

The time of death is central to Truscott's bid to clear his name and has been the focus of the Appeal Court's review of the conviction.

Five Ontario Court of Appeal judges have spent three weeks hearing testimony, some from those who were child witnesses in the original trial, but also fresh testimony calling previous testimony into question.

Forensic science is expected to play a major role in the final ruling. Over the course of the review, the court has heard testimony from forensic entomologists, coroners and pathologists that raises questions about the methods used to determine the time of Harper's death.

The professor's testimony wraps up this phase of the Ontario Court of Appeal's review of the murder conviction, but Crown and defence lawyers still have to make oral presentations of their arguments in January. A decision is expected in spring 2007.

The Appeal Court could either decide to allow Truscott's conviction to stand or set it aside. If the conviction is set aside, the court can choose to acquit him, issue a stay of proceedings without an acquittal or order a new trial.