Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - blueriver

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
I don’t even know for sure there was a third visit, I only remember Dennis’ car was recorded driving past the same place three times. I don’t remember any factual evidence he made three visits. During the police interview, he stated the last time he saw his father he had his back to him and was facing the computer. Then on the stand during the first trial, I believe Dennis stated he made a third visit and the las time he saw his father he was standing beside his assistant’s desk facing him. It crossed my mind the third visit was discussed with his lawyers and this is what was decided for him to say to cover for the ‘had his back to him, facing his computer’ plus adding minutes to the timeline of arriving at the wharf. I also don’t remember if there was a video of Dennis driving along Canterbury street? again after that first one where he parked.

I agree that these lawyers for Dennis have cost the family a very large chunk of money - huge money - but it’s all RO’s money being used to defend Dennis and tax payer money to prosecute Dennis twice.

If I am remembering wrong anyone please correct me. And Baysailor, 😁 brilliant question and a proscutor? 😂

I read most likely on twitter Dennis dropped the logbook off around 7 am the morning RO was discovered. Perhaps his mother was still asleep and he didn’t wake her.

The trading error was something like RO called Dennis in the afternoon and asked him to make two trades and Dennis traded one the wrong way or didn’t trade both the way RO requested. And RO called Dennis back complaining. That is probably not quite accurate as I do not remember exactly. To my knowledge, neither McFadden nor RO’s assistant were asked about this call if they overheard what RO said to Dennis or what his tone was? Also McFadden said he knew nothing of Dennis’s claim RO was going to give Dennis a large amount of money in the fall which Dennis used as a reason for an advance in pay.

Anyway, whoever did this was enraged - and came prepared.

The cellphone roaming error has not been cleared up yet either. Hopefully it will be and soon.

In my opinion, yes Dennis is so forgetful - forgot some of the genealogy things in his office, forgot he couldn’t get back into his office, forgot his routes while driving, forgot he went back to the third time, forgot the log book, forgot which jacket he was wearing .....

I, too, was interested in hearing from the cell phonee witness. RO’s cell phone received a text message at the same rime Dennis was at the wharf 6:44 pm. What could a roaming error really mean?

Didn’t Dennis and his father have some verbal altercation over the phone the afternoon about Dennis making an error in trading?

It appears that Dennis lived in the area his whole life and would certainly be familiar with any place he could have hidden a phone or a weapon even temporarily including his parents property or the river. His wife was ill and took cold medication - perhaps she was in a deep sleep and he got up. And didn’t RO have many tools which all had a special place when not in use? Was this area checked for anything missing?

I have not read today’s twitter feed of the trial but all he has to do on the stand is deny and like all defendants especially with high priced lawyers, be heavily coached on how to answer and body language. There is not a lot of proof he did this but the dna and the cell phone ping is serious evidence to me.

This was a crime of passion and rage.

Oh. I see thanks for helping me remember Have Faith.

Yes, he did claim it was a beer bottle but the witnesses
Said in first trial (and they were not on the stand but through
A statement or a video) after picking something up and
Putting it in the bag, Dennis walked to the end of wharf,
 sat down and took Something out of the bag and looked at it and put
It back. I think they said it was red. No information has
Been provided as to the colour of a phone case . Does anyone else
Remember this part? Or am I remembering wrong? Or is the reporter
Just not mentioning this on her twitter feed.

Regarding the two people at the wharf who witnessed Dennis
Carrying a bag, pick something up, put it the bag,
And walk to the end of the wharf and sit down. Did
They not also say he took something out of the
Bag, while sitting, look at it and put it back in the bag? Do I
Remember this wrong? I thought at the time this could have
Been Dennis looking at Dick’s phone that just received a text
At 6:44 pm. I think they also said it was red. I only read the
The twitter account on this case so perhaps it just wasn’t
Mentioned this time.

Thanks for the replies. If it was Shaw Gerry Lowe saw, wouldn’t
He have seen him come out of the printing shop door and not
Far End’s door? Or are they the same door entrance? I don’t think so though.

The defense is pushing the back entrance theory mostly by
Stating the killer would have left this way therefore be unseen. Until
He entered the street the video they produced shows. Blood splattered. I’m unsure if the
back door was accessible for entry without a key
as there is no door handle or at least it
looks that way in the picture. So unless the door was ajar, no one could enter.
So have been wondering what the Thandi’s video camera would have caught.
 The man Lowe saw would be another alternate theory.
Other than Dennis.

Hello Everyone,

I agree with both of you regarding the police and do feel sorry for King and Oram.
The defense is doing their best to state the killer left by
The back door and the police can’t remember if the door was locked. Not being a
Resident, Thandi’s video camera caught Dennis leaving by the front door only once? Did it
catch him entering three times? And did Thandi’s video camera catch the person
this Lowe person saw leaving at 7:30 pm? Not understanding exactly where the
Camera faced exactly, it’s a bit confusing. I am also rusty on the times etc.

Was the jacket colour a lie or was it a mistake? Seems it comes down to this. If it was a mistake, why didn't the defence pound this into the jury at the time? Of course maybe they did as the only way to follow the trial was by tweet. Did Dennis make a mistake in remembering the colour of a jacket he wore only 24 hours before? And then his father's DNA was found on this jacket. I seem to remember it was said his wife took the jackets and shirts to the dry cleaners on her own with no request from Dennis. I find it confusing the legalese 'circular reasoning' 'speculation by the Crown'. I believe I have watched or read about other trials where the prosecution has used 'speculation' in closing arguments. Again, it is difficult when one doesn't actually hear the closing arguments on either side in the trial. I was unable to watch the appeal.

I am curious as to why Dennis' sister Lisa doesn't appear to be around in the trial or this appeal. Also agree that maximum security is not required for Dennis. But where else do they send a person convicted of murder?

The family hired those expensive lawyers from Toronto to get Dennis off. The lawyers underestimated the intelligence of the jurors of Saint John who were selected from a jury pool of 5,000 (if I remember correctly). These Toronto lawyers know the laws and the precedents of the Court just like any New Brunswick lawyer and sent a 38 page document arguing that the convicted murderer Dennis is a really special convicted murderer - at further expense to the family, in my opinion - knowing all along the outcome. My feeling is, capeheart, the lawyers are just taking the money, all the way to Toronto. I think of all the poor people and all the abandoned abused animals and what all this money could have done to help them.

I agree, Capeheart. One thing I wanted to add that I remember specifically in the first released police interview is Dennis' response to the detective when he was asked if he killed his father. Dennis said something along the lines of "No. I wouldn't take someone's fun away." Something similar to that anyway.


I also read in one of the articles there were only two victim impact statements. Did anyone else read this? I would imagine one could be from the girlfriend but it is just a guess. I wonder who the other could be? Any guesses? A friend? A family member? Or were they published and I didn't notice as I didn't read the character reference or family members statements.

The victim impact statements were rec'd from Mr. John Ainsworth who owned the building where Mr. Oland's office was located and Mr. Preston Chiasson, an employee from Printing Plus, who together with Mrs. Adamson discovered the body.  Mr. Chiasson's, in particular, was very, very sad.

The Oland family and Ms Sedlecek had the opportunity to file victim impact statements, but declined to do so

Thank you. Yes, I would imagine Mr. Chiasson is and will be profoundly affected for the rest of his life as is and will be, Mr. Ainsworth.

I agree with all sentiments that the rich and powerful should not receive preferential treatment when it comes to our justice system.  The odds of this happening is apparent, compared to what happens to someone who doesn't have the means or power to influence anyone.  I believe that this is a fact whether documented or not.

From reading comments to the public media reports, I realize that this case has become a "class" war, as jb has determined with her excellent perception.

It is possible that DO might get bail because of his connections on the NB Court of Appeal.  (as noted by BaySailor).  He also might get bail due to the reasons that were expressed by quoted lawyer(s) in the media.  Regardless of the reason, it seems that the public reaction will be divided. 

Up to this point, I think that being from a wealthy, influential Oland family has been a detriment, not an asset to Dennis, because of the class war.   DO's big shot Toronto lawyer came across as arrogant to members on this board, and most likely had the same affect on the down to earth Saint John people who made up the jury.  I am not saying that the jury didn't convict DO based on the evidence, but it is a known fact that a defence lawyer, or a prosecutor, can turn off jurors.  DO's family paid for the best defence lawyer and it bombed.  The jury's verdict has been made grounds for an appeal, on the basis that no reasonable jury who adhered to the law (reasonable doubt) could have arrived at that verdict.  I'll wait until I see all the evidence that is hopefully made public before I change my mind about agreeing on that.  Stating that a class differential didn't affect the jury hasn't been proven imo.

 I can't find fault with the judge going with the jury's recommendation for possible parole after ten years.  For those who feel this is preferential treatment, if you trusted that the jury received all of the evidence and found him guilty, why would you not trust their recommendation on the parole term?

The second half of the police video shows that the police were using their usual tactics to get a confession.  I don't have a problem with that.

I was going to modify this post to add another comment, but will post a new one.  I find that I miss comments added on later by modified additions.


Very good exlanation to me what the defense is implying here. I also read somewhere (too many articles over the last few days) the defense questioning the jury's ability to know where the cell phone actually pinged. I think today's technology is pretty accurate. I read a lot about the Casey Anthony case and they had her cell phone pinging all over the place and were able to trace her steps so to speak. It's the defense's job to try to get this case thrown out, dismissed, go away. To criticise the jury is one way.

I also read in one of the articles there were only two victim impact statements. Did anyone else read this? I would imagine one could be from the girlfriend but it is just a guess. I wonder who the other could be? Any guesses? A friend? A family member? Or were they published and I didn't notice as I didn't read the character reference or family members statements.

I am thinking he will get bail as well and won't be surprised if he does.  I have watched half of the newly released police interview. I find it makes me extremely uncomfortable so cannot watch all at once. As I have previously stated, I do have some sympathy for Dennis. Not sure why other than his father was such a domineering selfish man.

Would anyone know if Dennis gets bail and his appeal does not happen for eight months then he loses his appeal and the conviction stands, would this eight months be deducted from his sentence or added on? Then, if the conviction stands, he will appeal again. Not sure when that would/could happen.

I have a question for baysailor if he/she comes back.

I am just curious, did Dick skipper his own yacht in these ocean races?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7