Case Summary
In January 1991, Maria Shepherd’s three-year-old stepdaughter, Kasandra, developed stomach flu symptoms. Her illness did not resolve and she suffered significant weight loss. Kasandra was hospitalized in February and placed on an IV drip. Doctors were unable to reach a diagnosis, but she was released four weeks later since her condition had somewhat improved.1
Two weeks after her hospital discharge, Kasanda’s symptoms returned and grew worse until she was vomiting almost every time she ate. She started losing her balance, tripping and falling frequently.2 On the evening of April 9, 1991, Kasandra had a grand mal seizure and became unresponsive. She was taken to Peel Memorial Hospital, where she continued to have seizures, and was then transferred to SickKids Hospital in Toronto. Doctors told Shepherd and her husband that Kasandra had severe brain swelling and her condition was not likely to improve. Kasandra was removed from life support on April 11, 1991.3
Charles Smith, then regarded as a leading pediatric forensic pathologist, conducted Kasandra’s post-mortem examination.4 Smith observed a bruise on the underside of Kasandra’s scalp at the back of her head, and bleeding in her brain in that area. He concluded that she had died from one or more “blows to the back of her head.”5 At Smith’s request, police searched Kasandra’s home for objects roughly corresponding to the shape of her bruise. They seized Shepherd’s watch, which Smith concluded matched up to the bruise. He told police his opinion that Shepherd had struck and killed Kasandra.6
Police questioned Shepherd and accused her of causing Kasandra’s death by inflicting the head injury. Smith’s pathology findings left no room for doubt: Kasandra had been fatally injured three to five hours before she started having seizures. Faced with this certainty, Shepherd tried to think of what she could have done. She recalled, and told the detective, that she had given Kasandra a push with the back of her hand as she was underfoot while Shepherd was caring for her other children.7 Shepherd knew that the push was neither harmful nor strong enough to cause Kasandra to fall down. Nonetheless, she was arrested and charged with manslaughter.8
Shepherd’s lawyer attempted, without success, to find an expert witness who could challenge Smith’s opinion. If she chose to stand trial, she would almost certainly be convicted.9 The Crown prosecutor intended to ask for a significant prison sentence. Shepherd had also learned that she was three months’ pregnant, which meant she would have to give birth in the penitentiary.10 However, if Shepherd pled guilty, the Crown would agree to a shorter sentence in a minimum security setting, where she could have family visits and likely be granted early parole.11 The Children’s Aid Society also agreed that Shepherd could regain custody of her children in the future if she pled guilty and thus showed remorse.12
Shepherd wanted to keep her family together, so she pled guilty to the charge of manslaughter.13 On October 22, 1992, she was sentenced to two years less a day to be served at a provincial facility close to her home and family. Five months into her sentence, Shepherd gave birth to a daughter. She was granted parole three months later, on June 21, 1993. Shepherd regained custody of her children in 1995.14
In the decade after Shepherd’s conviction, increasingly grave concerns came to light regarding Charles Smith’s forensic pathology work. In June 2005, the Chief Coroner of Ontario announced that a formal review would be conducted of all forensic pathology cases from 1991 to 2002 where Smith performed the autopsy or acted as a consultant.15 The results of the Chief Coroner’s Review were released in April 2007. In 20 of the 45 cases surveyed, the reviewing experts took issue with Smith’s interpretation of the evidence in his written report, testimony, or both. Shepherd’s case was one of these 20.16
In the wake of these troubling conclusions, Justice Stephen Goudge was appointed to lead a public inquiry into pediatric forensic pathology in Ontario.17 In 2007, the Goudge Inquiry Report revealed a staggering list of serious problems with Smith’s methodology and impartiality.18 Justice Goudge noted that Smith’s background in forensic pathology was “woefully inadequate,” since he had only been trained as a pediatric pathologist.19 Moreover, Smith “did not always ensure that he had all the relevant medical information before he conducted an autopsy,” and he was “sloppy and inconsistent in documenting the information” that he did have.20 In addition, Smith failed in his role as an expert witness by presenting his opinion in a “dogmatic and certain manner when the evidence was far from certain.”21 Justice Goudge found that Smith often “provided unbalanced or emotive testimony, which tended to invite inappropriate and adverse conclusions.”22
Justice Goudge sharply criticized Smith’s handling of Kasandra’s case. The Inquiry determined that Smith’s method of “matching” Shepherd’s watch to Kasandra’s bruise was baseless pseudoscience. Since the bruising was not on the surface of her scalp, “the presence of thick hair and scalp tissues altered the appearance of the injury, making such a technique useless.”23 There was no basis for Smith’s conclusion that Shepherd’s watch had struck Kasandra, but merely that some sort of impact occurred.24
Furthermore, Justice Goudge found that Smith was “indiscriminate in accepting and appearing to rely on information about the social history of those allegedly involved in the death” of children like Kasandra.25 Smith would include prejudicial content such as a child’s ethnic background and family structure in his autopsy reports. Shepherd was of Filipino descent, her husband was Black, and their family unit included children of different parentage. It appeared that medically irrelevant information of this nature potentially played a role in Smith’s decision-making process.26
In light of these developments, Shepherd was granted an extension of time to appeal her conviction in 2009.27 The Ontario Court of Appeal heard fresh evidence from forensic pathology experts, who unanimously agreed that there was nothing to support Smith’s conclusion that Shepherd had killed Kasandra. There simply was no link between her watch and Kasandra’s bruise; Smith’s attempt to create that connection was “medically unsupportable”.28 This injury could have occurred in many ways, including a fall. Moreover, what Smith had described as bleeding in Kasandra’s brain near the site of the bruise was in fact a product of the autopsy itself.29
On February 29, 2016, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned Shepherd’s wrongful conviction and acquitted her.30 Smith had by then been stripped of his medical licence at a 2011 disciplinary hearing for disgraceful conduct.31
Shepherd became a licenced paralegal mere months after her acquittal. Her areas of practice include wrongful conviction advocacy. Shepherd was elected to Innocence Canada’s Board of Directors in June 2018.32