Book Review – Proof, Beverley McLachlin

Simon & Schuster, Toronto, 2024

Gilles Renaud[1]

Law Dean John Wigmore, the author of a famous book on evidence, once wrote, “The lawyer must know human nature. … He [or she] must deal understandingly with its types and motives. These he [or she] cannot all find close around … For this learning [they] must go to fiction which is the gallery of life’s portraits…”[2] The same logic and need for a fundamental understanding of the men and women who make up our society exist for police officers. You as police officers must understand all types and motives that make up human nature and fiction writers can assist mightily in this task. 

With this background in mind, I read this third work of fiction by the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada[3], hoping to draw from it many lessons as to human nature, exhibited by police officers in their vital work of protecting and serving society. The collection draws out the courtroom battles of a Vancouver-based defence lawyer, Jilly Truitt, and each teaches us about police work.  Indeed, Proof provides material for a dozen hour long classes taught at police colleges on the challenges well-trained officers’ face in seeking out the authors of crime.

The author, drawing upon a lifetime of experience as a lawyer, law professor and judge, and a deep knowledge of philosophy and psychology, provides a number of insightful discussions involving Truitt and the lead investigator in a murder case involving a five year. Detective Igor Kan has a number of successful investigations of terrible crimes to his credit and is described as a formidable officer, highly intelligent and quite analytical who is neither intimidated by defence counsel nor by the criminal justice system. We read at page 206 that he is “… more sensitive and urbane than the average cop and wilier by half.” Their interactions provide great instruction for police officers seeking illustrations of some of the thorniest issues that confront you during your investigations. Drawing out a few of these may assist you in deciding whether you would undertake the same steps in your work as investigators. In reviewing these passages, recall that the lawyer expresses these feelings at page 25: “… I don’t like police. After years in defence, I’ve learned not to trust them …”

The first example is found at page 27 and describes Detective Kan’s reaction to counsel’s objection to his decision to hold a physical lineup: “I have my reasons”, Kan growls. “As you will soon appreciate”. On the one hand, the author makes plain that there is a need for the police to assert, perhaps vigorously as you may decide (or not) to act, the rights of the investigator to move forward based on information that is significant and that you have evaluated to be reliable.

A second illustration occurs at page 35 where we read: “The booth where Detective Kan and I sit is dark. He folds his large hands in his lap and takes pains to respect my personal space.” Police officers do well to imitate this example, avoiding accusations of intimidating conduct.

“We’ll get to the bottom of this, you may be sure” is a phrase Detective Kan resorts to at page 47 when speaking to the parent of the missing (and presumed dead) child, a parent who is the prime suspect. This is a classic issue for police officers when speaking to victims: how confident must you be in prophesying a successful outcome? What does one say when speaking to the parents of a kidnap victim, by way of limited example? What balance is to be struck between confidence generating comments meant to reassure and bold predictions that are based on little but hope?

The next quote to be discussed briefly is found at page 94: “Kan’s voice betrays his ebbing patience …” The detective is being asked questions during a press conference. Former Chief Justice McLachlin is quite adept at illustrating the minefield that police must negotiate as they seek to provide much needed information to the public, in appropriate cases, and yet not betray investigative avenues that are being pursued and, above all, not to demonstrate tunnel vision in explaining the course of the investigation.  One can hardly state that “This was an easy case” or comments to that effect.  As Detective Kan adds, we investigate and charge, if appropriate, and the prosecution seeks to convince the independent tribunal of the merits of our work.

“… Solved four murders in the last year. Quickly developing legend status.” This quote, found at page 100, demonstrates the danger of what in sports terms is often described as “believing the press clippings about your talent”. The player who scored four goals the night before still has to help their team win the next game; the detective who enjoyed success in last investigation must not rest upon reputation. The reward for hard work is often greater opportunities to work even more diligently.  The author adds comments such as “… putting notches in his belt of convictions until he clinches the rank of commissioner…” at page 130 in order to describe the prejudice of defence counsel.  If Ms. Pruitt’s child were kidnapped, whom would she wish to be entrusted with the investigation?

Chapter 16, at pages 103 to 114 is of interest as it discusses the difficult question of promoting a release from custody order in the expectation that the suspect may commit a mistake whilst at large, perhaps revealing clues to the crime you are investigating.

The no less trying question of calling off a search for a missing person, a child in this case, when the investigation clearly concludes with a finding that the body was disposed of at sea, in the case of Proof, is touched upon frequently by the author.  For example, at page 127, we read “If it turns out the child is alive and the police have stopped looking, there will be hell to pay.”  There is no easy answer but the book makes plain that the police must constantly assess the situation and cannot easily make decisions based on budgetary constraints.  It is easy for outsiders to say this, however …

The last one hundred pages contain a great number of other pertinent examples of sound police work and of conflicting exchanges between the defence and the lead investigators. One can only profit from the author’s intelligent and interesting perspective by reading the “issues” that I will now list and that interested readers may consult: “tunnel vision” at p. 120, p. 175, p. 182 and p. 208; “push parent to confess who has lost child – inhumane” at p. 130; “racing for convictions: at p. 131; “[Police] do not work to prove they are wrong” at p. 134; police calling victim by first name at p. 155; “… usual police-dictated here’s what we think you [as witness] told us, sign …” at p. 192; responding to defence hectoring by stating “Do not lecture me on my duty …” at p. 210; “… treat the addled witness with dignity…” at p. 228; “looking for a known sexual predator is always the cops’ first recourse” at p. 247; “[defence strategy] Sloppy policework and a plausible alternate suspect” at p. 394.

I hasten to add that all police officers are sure to profit from this well-honed demonstration of sound police work and no less competent defence work, when promoting the defence of an alternative suspect.  This scenario is guaranteed to lead to conflict and the author provides a compelling account of how independent thought is required of police investigators, in general, but more so in such scenarios. 

One of the concluding chapters, number 73, is perhaps the most valuable of all of the fascinating accounts of the exchanges involving police and Pruitt as one reads with fascination of a potential confession by a police officer of flaws in the investigation and of a resolve not to commit such errors in the future. I leave it to the police readers to devote some energy in buying or borrowing the book from the public library to discover whether it arises in cross-examination or in her office after a fascinating denouement to the officer’s final hours on the case. Simply put, Proofis a great guide to police work and to the many issues surrounding procedures and human nature that bedevil your work while providing a great deal of entertainment.  

 _________________________________________________

[1]           Ontario Court of Justice – 1995 to 2023 [Retired] Formerly an Assistant Crown Attorney and a Prosecutor, Canadian Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Section, Department of Justice – Canada) Interested readers may contact the reviewer to further their understanding or to describe my errors – grenaud15943@gmail.com.

[2]           Refer to “A List of One Hundred Legal Novels” (1922) 17 Ill. L. Rev. 26, at p. 31.

[3]           The two prior novels are Full Disclosure, published in 2019, and Denial in 2021, also published by Simon & Schuster. Both have received excellent reviews and sold quite well.