Case Summary
Richard Catcheway is the descendant of a Residential School Survivor. He does not remember his mother, who died of alcohol abuse when he was four years old. His father was not involved in his upbringing. He was placed in several foster homes in Manitoba after his mother died. He ran away several times, used illegal substances, dropped out before eighth grade and struggled to maintain employment.1 In 2000, Catcheway was diagnosed with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) and attention deficit disorder (ADD).2 In March of 2017, Catcheway was a regular user of crystal methamphetamine.3
On the night of March 10, 2017, someone broke into a house in Winnipeg, Manitoba, and stole electronics.4 Catcheway was arrested in September of the same year and charged with breaking and entering offences.5
While in custody, he began going through crystal methamphetamine withdrawal.6 Catcheway was made to believe that there was a video statement claiming he was at the scene of the crime at the time of the offense.7 Catcheway did not want to endure the stress of a trial, and it was not clear that he could read and comprehend the charges that were laid against him. Despite alternating between saying that he could not remember his whereabouts on March 10, 2017, and insisting he was not at the scene of the crime, with the assistance of defence counsel, Catcheway eventually pleaded guilty. He spent more than six months in jail.8
Catcheway could not have committed the crime because he was in prison in Brandon, Manitoba - over 200km away from the crime scene - at the time of the offense. A few weeks after he pled guilty, a prison administrator sent Catcheway’s lawyer a letter stating this fact. At multiple stages of this case - Catcheway’s arrest, the decision to remand him in custody, the review of the charges by the Crown prosecutor, the review of the case by Catcheway’s defence lawyer, the pre-sentencing review by his probation officer, and the final review by the judge - the information that would have shown he could not have committed the crime was readily available on his criminal record, yet was somehow missed.9
Upon learning this exculpatory evidence, the Manitoba Court of Appeal quashed Catcheway’s conviction and directed his acquittal. It stated: “We are all of the view that, in light of the fresh evidence that conclusively proves the accused’s innocence, it would understandably be a miscarriage of justice to uphold his guilty plea."10 In all, Catcheway spent many months in prison for a crime he could not have committed.