As he outlined the case against Robert Sanderson in a gruesome triple murder, purportedly stemming from a biker turf war over street level prostitution in Winnipeg, prosecutor George Dangerfield pointed to the most damning piece of evidence -- a hair found on one of the victims.

"Robert Sanderson leaves a piece of himself at the crime scene," said Mr. Dangerfield while recounting the testimony of an RCMP forensic officer who said the accused's hair was "unique" and "microscopically consistent" with the sample on the victim.

Mr. Dangerfield then dealt with the notion that someone else carried the hair on their clothes to the crime scene. "Possible. But not very likely," stated the Winnipeg prosecutor in his closing address to the jury on June 24, 1997.

After deliberating for 16 hours, the jury returned with guilty verdicts against Sanderson and his codefendants Roger Sanderson (no relation) and Robert Tews, in the August 1996 shooting and stabbing deaths of three men.

The defendants were sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for at least 25 years. The Manitoba Court of Appeal upheld the conviction of Robert Sanderson in 1999 in a terse, seven-paragraph ruling.

But after more than a dozen years in prison, now serving his life sentence in a federal institution in British Columbia, Robert Sanderson, 39, continues to maintain his innocence.

"I had a long criminal history. I don't deny it. But I am here for something I didn't do," the soft-spoken former associate of the Los Bravos biker gang said in a recent telephone interview with the National Post.

Protestations of innocence from people convicted of murder are not uncommon. But the case against Robert Sanderson now looks very different than it did in the spring of 1997.

The hair evidence has since been refuted. Convictions obtained by Mr. Dangerfield in other cases were later called into question and became the subject of two provincial inquiries. The Sanderson case has many similarities to those cases, including the use of now discredited forensic techniques and reliance on unsavory Crown witnesses.

The hair samples from Sanderson and the one found on the victim were subjected to DNA testing in 2004, as part of a broad review initiated by the Manitoba government.

"The DNA profiles are without question from two different unrelated individuals," stated the review committee in its August, 2004, report.

Bruce MacFarlane, the then-Deputy Attorney General of Manitoba, ordered a re-examination of the Sanderson case and promised it would be finished within six months.

In October 2005, the province issued a one-page news release. "There continues to be a strong circumstantial case. It is not an obvious miscarriage of justice," said the news release. The review was conducted by Heather Leonoff, director of the constitutional law branch in the Manitoba Justice department. A request for comment from Ms. Leonoff was referred to Eileen O'Donnell, a department spokeswoman.

She confirmed that Ms. Leonoff re-examined court documents, although she did not conduct any new interviews. A request for a copy of any report written by Ms. Leonoff was turned down. "Documents that relate to prosecutorial decisions about whether to pursue or not pursue a matter are privileged as a matter of law and not subject to public disclosure," Ms. O'Donnell said.

What the province called a strong circumstantial case hinged on the testimony of two witnesses and evidence that Sanderson's car was at the crime scene.

Sanderson has always admitted that he lent out his car, but declined to say who borrowed the vehicle. At the same time he willingly provided bodily samples for forensic testing.

The supposed turf war was not clearly defined during the trial so the Crown relied heavily on the testimony of admitted drug-dealer Brent Stevenson and T.M., a 15-year-old prostitute and drug user who used to work for Sanderson.

Stevenson conceded he "lied most of the time," as he gave testimony that implicated all three defendants. Several of his criminal charges were dropped in the months after the trial and in September 1998, he signed a deal with Winnipeg police in which he received $15,000 in relocation expenses.

Roger Sanderson was subsequently acquitted after his third trial in 2005, when a jury rejected the testimony of Stevenson.

Despite the deal, the Crown stated in its written arguments in the Robert Sanderson appeal that "there was no suggestion" charges against Stevenson would be dropped in exchange for his testimony at the original trial.

T.M. started dating Stevenson soon after the killings, yet denied they spoke about the case. Her evidence at the trial included many more details than she previously told police.

There was no corroboration of her testimony against Robert Sanderson, yet the Manitoba Court of Appeal said the trial judge was not required to tell the jury this was necessary to convict.

The Driskell Inquiry report, released in February 2007 in connection with the wrongful conviction of James Driskell, recommended an independent external review of cases prosecuted by Mr. Dangerfield where there was a claim of a wrongful conviction.

Manitoba Justice considers the Sanderson matter closed, although it would "co-operate" if he is successful in obtaining a federal review of his case, explained Ms. O'Donnell. Sanderson feels that is his only hope.

"The Manitoba government does not like to admit when it is wrong," he said. "It feels like my case got swept under a rug."

The Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted has been asked by Sanderson to look into case. "We are investigating," said lawyer James Lockyer. The well-known advocate on behalf of the wrongly convicted said his personal view is that the discredited hair evidence is, on its own, sufficient to support a call for a new trial.

But Sanderson faces obstacles beyond what is left of the Crown case, and a provincial government that could be loath to explore another possible wrongful conviction.

Even today in legal circles in Winnipeg, those familiar with the case suggest Sanderson was a "bad guy" back in 1996 -- something he doesn't deny, but which is not the legal standard of proof for a conviction in Canada.

"I have grown up in prison," said Sanderson, who would like to continue skills he has developed as a native artist if he is someday released from prison. "All I am asking for is a fair trial."