Frank Ostrowski vows to seek compensation for overturned murder conviction

A man who spent years behind bars for a homicide conviction that was ultimately overturned says he plans to sue the Manitoba government for compensation.

Frank Ostrowski's case was handled by George Dangerfield, the former Crown prosecutor at the centre of at least three wrongful convictions in Manitoba. One of those accused, Kyle Unger, reached an out-of-court settlement with the province on Monday.

"I'm very happy for Kyle Unger that it's finally over with and he's got a settlement, that's for sure — he's been waiting for a long time, and he deserves it," Ostrowski said. 

As for his own case, Ostrowski said his lawyers are getting ready to sue for compensation, and he hopes to stick it to those who convicted him.

"It's not the end. I'm going after these people. And they'd better have some Depends [adult diapers] to wear." 

Ostrowski's conviction in the 1986 shooting death of Robert Nieman was quashed last fall, but he's frustrated he wasn't formally acquitted. 

Defence lawyer Greg Brodsky supports the idea of compensation for Ostrowski and anyone else who gets Dangerfield convictions quashed.

"This settlement demonstrates to the world that the government is prepared to acknowledge that there have been wrongful convictions," Brodsky said, "and that may encourage other people to come forward." 

Acquittals have also been issued for Thomas Sophonow and James Driskell, who were eventually compensated with $2.6 million and $4 million, respectively. 

The Innocence Project is working with at least two more people who say they were wrongfully convicted by Dangerfield: Brian Anderson, whose case is being reviewed by the federal Justice Department, and Robert Sanderson. 

A 2007 inquiry into Driskell's case ended with calls for an independent, external review into all of Dangerfield's cases.

A spokesperson for Manitoba Justice said the province retained former Justice Roger Salhany for such a review, which began with a look at the Ostrowski case, but it ended after being transferred to the federal minister.

"Independent reviews of alleged wrongful convictions since that time have been through the [Criminal Code] section 696 process to the federal minister," the spokesperson said. 

Innocence Canada counsel Bhavan Sodhi said with the recurring issues with Dangerfield's convictions, it "begs the question as to whether how many other cases there might be where Dangerfield was involved."

She's involved in Anderson's appeal, which is premised not on fresh evidence but a new idea: that racial discrimination is inherent in the justice system.

His case, as well as Sanderson's are still pending under the criminal conviction review group. 

Milgaard wants permanent review commission

David Milgaard — who was exonerated after spending more than two decades in prison in the 1969 murder of Saskatoon nursing aide Gail Miller — would like to see an overhaul of the way Canada reviews convictions. 

"Here you are inside a situation where you've been wronged in the worst possible way you could be wronged, you're living inside a prison for something you had nothing to do with. An then the very same system has a system within the system, which is flawed. Which is supposed to be there to get you out, given the chance that you can put something forward there that shows you're not guilty. 

"It doesn't work well. And we need an independent board of inquiry as soon as we can possibly get one." 

He'd like to see a review system like in the United Kingdom. There, the independent Criminal Cases Review Commission specifically looks into wrongful convictions and sends cases for appeal.

Milgaard will be in Winnipeg Sunday to tell his story — and how it being told in the press helped exonerate him — at an event at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. 

'Took advantage of me'

At the crux of Ostrowski's appeal was whether key evidence was disclosed to his defence lawyers. That included a deal the Crown struck with its key witness to stay his drug charges if he testified against Ostrowski, and a report from an officer that contradicted the witness's testimony.

Brodsky said he was friends with Dangerfield — who even set up his speakers at one point — and the senior prosecutor had an aura of confidence that stopped people from confronting him.

"I didn't think that he would take advantage of me," Brodsky said, referring to not getting the disclosures. "I didn't think he would take advantage of a lawyer, I didn't think that he would take advantage of a lawyer who was his friend." 

In its decision, the Appeal Court found that the Crown's failure to disclose this evidence impaired Ostrowski's defence, because his lawyer could have used it to challenge the credibility of important details in the case against him.

Now, Brodsky says he's changed his approach to dealing with prosecutors. 

"I think that I'm more careful now to be more specific in what I'm looking for because of what happened in other cases," he said.