Uploaded June 2010 | Updated September 2026, 13 hours ago
The couple convicted more than seven years ago in the notorious beating death of Randal Dooley is arguing that they deserve a new trial because the jury came to its verdicts based more on emotion than the evidence.
Edward (Tony) Dooley and Marcia Dooley assert that they received an unfair trial and blame Ontario Superior Court Justice Eugene Ewaschuk, suggesting he made numerous legal errors, some of which inflamed the jury.
Clayton Ruby, who represents Tony Dooley, concedes in documents filed with the Ontario Court of Appeal that it was a "tragic and emotional case" and there were "numerous" opportunities for "hatred" and "disgust" toward the defendants.
But the lawyer argues that Judge Ewaschuk failed his duty to ensure the jury carried out its task in an objective fashion.
The judge "was alive to this need, but unfortunately undercut his own efforts in this regard by using inflammatory language certain to elevate the emotions of the jury," writes Mr. Ruby, in advance of the appeal hearing this month.
A jury convicted the couple of second-degree murder in April 2002, nearly four years after seven-year-old Randal was found dead in the bunk bed he shared with his brother Tego, in the family home in the Scarborough section of Toronto.
An autopsy revealed that Randal had 13 fractured ribs, a lacerated liver and four brain injuries. There were numerous signs of ongoing physical abuse. The seven-year-old boy weighed only 42 pounds when he died.
The couple convicted more than seven years ago in the notorious beating death of Randal Dooley is arguing that they deserve a new trial because the jury came to its verdicts based more on emotion than the evidence.
Edward (Tony) Dooley and Marcia Dooley assert that they received an unfair trial and blame Ontario Superior Court Justice Eugene Ewaschuk, suggesting he made numerous legal errors, some of which inflamed the jury.
Clayton Ruby, who represents Tony Dooley, concedes in documents filed with the Ontario Court of Appeal that it was a "tragic and emotional case" and there were "numerous" opportunities for "hatred" and "disgust" toward the defendants.
But the lawyer argues that Judge Ewaschuk failed his duty to ensure the jury carried out its task in an objective fashion.
The judge "was alive to this need, but unfortunately undercut his own efforts in this regard by using inflammatory language certain to elevate the emotions of the jury," writes Mr. Ruby, in advance of the appeal hearing this month.
A jury convicted the couple of second-degree murder in April 2002, nearly four years after seven-year-old Randal was found dead in the bunk bed he shared with his brother Tego, in the family home in the Scarborough section of Toronto.
An autopsy revealed that Randal had 13 fractured ribs, a lacerated liver and four brain injuries. There were numerous signs of ongoing physical abuse. The seven-year-old boy weighed only 42 pounds when he died.
