Jack White

From age nine to twenty-one, John (“Jack”) White suffered the so-called care of the state. He had lived in foster homes prior to being placed in the now defunct Huronia Regional Centre, in Orillia, because he had been “judged incapable of learning.”¹ The facility’s residents – many of whom lived with severe developmental disabilities –  were not safe there. Staff subjected residents, including White, to ubiquitous physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. Huronia was shut down in 2009, and the Ontario government entered a $35 million settlement agreement with survivors following a class-action lawsuit.²

White was released from Huronia after his IQ was assessed as normal. He worked as a cook while completing his fifth through twelfth grade education. After obtaining his high school equivalency, White completed a certificate program qualifying him to work with people with intellectual disabilities.³ In 1970, he went back to Huronia, where he was a residential counsellor for the next twenty-three years. He was widely recognized for his work and volunteer activities in the community.⁴

As part of his role, White assisted police with a criminal investigation into the death of a boy who had lived at the facility in the 1950s. He also co-authored a report that criticized some of his co-workers, including one Daniel Wither, for their abusive treatment of residents. White has since stated that as a result, there was “bad blood” between himself and other Huronia employees, to the extent that he received death threats.⁵

In 1993, Wither accused White of sexually assaulting a resident. He claimed that in 1989, he had witnessed White grab a resident’s breast and make lewd comments while she was in the shower – but had not reported this to his superiors, because he had not realized that such conduct was not merely inappropriate, but assaultive. The resident in question was nonverbal and so could not give evidence.⁶

White stood trial on the sexual assault charge in 1995. The trial took only a little over an hour.⁷ White had provided his lawyer with the names of potential witnesses who could have testified on his behalf regarding Wither’s lack of credibility and retaliatory motive for making a false allegation. However, White’s counsel took no action to follow up on this exculpatory information. His lawyer also did not make use of documents already in his possession, for instance, a letter written by Wither expressing contempt for White. As a result, none of this evidence was placed before the court.⁸ Further, White had expected to take the stand – but to his surprise, his lawyer did not call him as a witness. Without consulting with his client beforehand, defence counsel simply announced that he would not be leading any evidence.⁹

Unsurprisingly given this conduct, White was promptly found guilty. The jurors had deliberated for a mere 62 minutes. White received a suspended sentence (essentially, he would have a criminal record but not face prison time). The sentencing judge remarked on White’s deep commitment to Huronia’s residents – excepting, it appeared, this “completely out of character incident” for such “a caring and dedicated employee.”¹⁰

White applied to Legal Aid Ontario for financial help to appeal his conviction, but his application was denied.¹¹ Nonetheless he made many attempts to rectify his wrongful conviction, including “an unsuccessful appeal to [the Ontario Court of Appeal] . . . in 1996, a successful result at an arbitration hearing that was later quashed by the courts, [and] an application for ministerial review” that did not move forward.¹²

Finally, James Lockyer of Innocence Canada (formerly AIDWYC) assisted White in appealing his conviction to the Supreme Court of Canada. In December 1999, the court granted White’s request for his case to be reheard. It directed the Ontario Court of Appeal to reconsider White’s case and determine if he had been wrongfully convicted because his counsel was ineffective.¹³

In June 2010, the Court of Appeal found that White had suffered a miscarriage of justice.¹⁴ In reaching this decision, the court reviewed fresh evidence that confirmed he had not “receive[d] effective assistance of counsel.”¹⁵ These materials established that Wither had “a motive to falsely implicate” White.¹⁶ Had the jurors heard this evidence, it could have undercut Wither’s “explanation for his failure to report the alleged assault at the time”¹⁷ – which was “in breach of a directive . . . to immediately report incidents of sexual abuse.”¹⁸ The Court of Appeal quashed White’s conviction and ordered a new trial.¹⁹

Rather than proceed with a second trial, the Crown withdrew the sexual assault charge against White in November 2010. Crown counsel stated that “after meeting with OPP investigators and the principal witness [i.e., Withers], she [had] concluded there was no reasonable chance of conviction.”²⁰

The presiding judge described White’s life story as “remarkable” and said that he was “delighted” that the charge had been withdrawn. Addressing White, he stated: “[this is] a day you have cause to celebrate[,] and I hope you will.”²¹