JUSTICE OR VENGEANCE - BOURDEAU MURDER CASE

And that is the rub! What murder case? Quoting from Saturday's Waterloo Region Record "A key to the case was the inabilty of a pathologist - due to decomposition and other damage to the body - to determine a cause of death or find evidence of definite injuries consistent with a violent attack.". Therefore there was absolutely no way to know if the dead woman had drowned by accident or committed suicide. Both she and the accused had been drinking that night and were alcoholics. Yes he had a horrible reputation including evidence of being violent with the dead woman. However criminal cases are not supposed to be about being on the balance of probablilites as civil cases are. They are supposed to be decided on gulity beyond a reasonable doubt. "Reasonable doubt" - The Crown couldn't even prove on any basis whatsoever that a crime had been committed. Murder - what murder? Therefore how is it possible to convict a person of a crime, beyond a reasonable doubt - when you can't even prove that a crime was committed in the first place? This is Kafkaesque and Orwellian. This is not what are Justice system is supposed to be.