Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
I’m wondering if the regular dry cleaning process will remove blood spots...without the customer pointing them out to the cleaner.
 I googled the answer...but I still don’t really know.
The blood up Dennis’s cuff is damning, in my opinion.
I also wondered that about the log book.
I can’t get over the fact that Dennis dropped the log book off at his mom’s...but didn’t visit, unless she wasn’t home.
 Not sure if I know when Dennis actually went there.
He owed all that money, but didn’t worry?  I hadn’t heard there had been words over a trading error....Dick must have been fed up with his son’s financial isssues.  Bailing out a 40 something year old child is no fun.

Dennis' mom may testify tomorrow, jobo.  If so, no doubt the subject may come up.  The Defence had indicated on Friday it still had  a couple of witnesses to call and, notably, the local  newspaper reported that she and his uncle (I'm assuming her brother, not Mr. Oland's) were cleared from the courtroom during Dennis' testimony.  Of course that could mean something else entirely. His Defence doesn't always deliver on the things they say they will do (it was the same at the first trial - a big buildup - then nothing).  I suppose it may be a tactic to keep the Crown off balance.  We shall have to wait and see.  After the cellphone witness fiasco, I'm not exactly holding my breath.
22
I’m wondering if the regular dry cleaning process will remove blood spots...without the customer pointing them out to the cleaner.
 I googled the answer...but I still don’t really know.
The blood up Dennis’s cuff is damning, in my opinion.
I also wondered that about the log book.
I can’t get over the fact that Dennis dropped the log book off at his mom’s...but didn’t visit, unless she wasn’t home.
 Not sure if I know when Dennis actually went there.
He owed all that money, but didn’t worry?  I hadn’t heard there had been words over a trading error....Dick must have been fed up with his son’s financial isssues.  Bailing out a 40 something year old child is no fun.
23
I just came across this article... one I saved from the web page created way back (when Baba was still taking part).  I don't have the link for it, but it was public at the time, so maybe it will be alright? :-\    The following news article alone sparks many questions for me - one being, as I've harped on forever:  Why was Stephen Kozaruk not investigated?  And why was there no press whatsoever pointing to him as a possible suspect who was actually referred to Chief Kettles by a "heads up notice" from Manitoba police?  At no point was Kettles ever asked why he completely disregarded Kozaruk as a suspect.. or why he may have ruled him out.  The article also spooks one to think that
Quote
a prime suspect was ruled out as being considered out of town when it happened. .. what a crock! (that being the politician's son)
No wonder the case was never settled!  or progressed! Here is why!  from Baba back at the beginning - telling it like it is - In fact; nothing to the contrary has transpired as of yet!  One can only imagine the Karma and horrors that must have beset those guilty of her murder and and/or hiding the facts - keeping quiet for whatever reason or benifit it might have for them.

The area in which she was buried alive, was on the upper part of a large riverbank, by a clump of trees. There were homes across the street from this riverbank. Someone heard something. Someone saw something. Someone was on the river, or across the river on the opposite bank.

The family put up a $10,000 reward at the time. In 1962, that was a lot of money...why did no one come forward??? Police affiliation or corruption, or cover up, whatever you want to call it...it happened. Saskatoon, had little mafias all over the city, at the time. There are always crooked police, in those circumstances. Missing evidence, early on in the investigation. Evidence sent to other cities, why? why? why? Records disappearing all over the place. Further hampering any honest police officers attempts to find Alexandra's killers. Many police officers were told to mind their own business, at the time.

Why was this investigation impeded in so many ways. Whether, it was inexperience or not, I cannot believe the photos I have seen of the head of the police department in Saskatoon smiling and/or laughing beside Alexandra's coffin. This was a shock to the City of Saskatoon, and devastated the innocence of this beautiful city, and he is happy??? "A picture can paint a 1000 words."

The murder of Alexandra Wiwcharuk has spurred many emotions since 1962. Everyone in Saskatoon, was effected by this murder, and everyone who knew Alexandra. Their lives would never be the same, and all of them have their gentle reminders of what had happened to such an innocent young woman. Their lifeline would forever be changed! Today, powerful emotions still arise from the "Death of a Beauty Queen - Alexandra Wiwcharuk."

24
The jacket

First trial did show blood stains on the lining, inside the sleeves, pics are onsite somewhere.  Funny it is not discussed now by prosecution. Suddenly it is only a few bloods spots on front of jacket.  Not true.

Log Book

Is it possible that D picked up that log book, after going through it with him, telling his father that he had to return it,  placing it back into the Sobey's bag and then immediately murdered his father?

I agree with all of the posters  points.  Good thinking.

jb
25
Well this time it's in the hands of "Judge alone", he will make the decision and weigh the DNA evidence and the circumstantial evidence and  testimony of witnesses and all the rules that come with the making of a decision. If Dennis remembered too much, it would look like he was remembering every minute of the day to cover his alibi. So if he says things that he forgot this and that, it may look normal.  He may know exactly what he did to cover up his crime. It is unusual for him to take the stand and this is kind of the last straw, he's hanging onto the last bit of hope there is and this can be the only thing he can do to help save himself from years in prison. So it will be up to the Judge in this case and I don't think it will be a flash decision. :o :o :o :o :o
26
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.


You are correct about the trading error.  Don't remember hearing whether or not they had spoken about it, though.  I had originally thought that might have accounted for some of his confusion and preoccupation with other things prior to meeting with his father that night.  I thought he might have been worrying about his father's reaction but according to him, all appears to have been well on that front.




27
Oh yes, I’d forgotten that Dennis wife was sick with a cold that night. Never heard where his kids were...

Yes...this crime was up close and personal...
The blood on Dennis’s coat is damning evidence even if there’s only four spots..
And the cell phone forensics is important evidence...I agree.
Problem with liars...the story always changes.
28
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.
29
I’ve read a few articles, now, on the re-trial.
The (so called) witnesses admit they are struggling with concrete memory of the day Dick was murdered...and yet...Dennis is easily explaining away his movements that day and he “forgot” what jacket he was wearing and “forgot” how many times he went to Dicks office....he was very busy...was all over the goddammy town that evening.
I am more apt to forgive these witnesses than I am to Dennis for lack of accurate memory.

The cell phone evidence is interesting...last ping in Rothesay...only thing taken from Dicks office.
Probably has been destroyed and hidden, with the murder weapon...and whatever was used/worn to protect clothes from blood spatter.
Wonder if forensics ever confiscated the secretaries clothes to see if she ever got blood on them from Dicks head scabs...that’s how blood got on Dennis jacket, according to Dennis.

Did they search mom’s property? A sniffer dog would have been able to trace Dennis’s steps...he says he returned the log book...but he left it and didn’t visit....
Instead of wanting to clear his name....Dennis (and his mom) should be yelling loud and clear that the killer is still loose.
Haven’t heard that...

I had never even considered that possibility, jobo.  If such a search ever took  place, I'm not aware that it ever made the news and I think it likely would have.  Since she wasn't a suspect, for one thing, I don't know if police would have any reasonable expectation of obtaining a search warrant although I don't believe he was a registered owner of the boat and they were able to search that.  To give Dennis credit, I'm not sure he would involve his mother in something like that even if she were to know nothing about it.  Still, I suppose nothing can be ruled out.  It's certainly worth thinking about.

I still believe him regarding his testimony about the jacket but, once again, I found details in his account of his three visits to the office that I found somewhat implausible.

It's unfortunate the Defence decided after their dispute with the Crown not to call the expert cell phone witness.  I had based much of my opinion on the previous verdict on the cell phone evidence and was keenly interested in what this witness had to say.  A lot of the rest is really just so much smoke and mirrors.  There had been much hype from the Defence around the appearance of this witness and since he wasn't called, it leaves me, at least, with the impression that his testimony may not, in total, have been all that favourable to Dennis.  Given the obvious police blunders and the perceived weak case of the Crown, I'm left wondering, why were they so worried?
30
I’ve read a few articles, now, on the re-trial.
The (so called) witnesses admit they are struggling with concrete memory of the day Dick was murdered...and yet...Dennis is easily explaining away his movements that day and he “forgot” what jacket he was wearing and “forgot” how many times he went to Dicks office....he was very busy...was all over the goddammy town that evening.
I am more apt to forgive these witnesses than I am to Dennis for lack of accurate memory.

The cell phone evidence is interesting...last ping in Rothesay...only thing taken from Dicks office.
Probably has been destroyed and hidden, with the murder weapon...and whatever was used/worn to protect clothes from blood spatter.
Wonder if forensics ever confiscated the secretaries clothes to see if she ever got blood on them from Dicks head scabs...that’s how blood got on Dennis jacket, according to Dennis.

Did they search mom’s property? A sniffer dog would have been able to trace Dennis’s steps...he says he returned the log book...but he left it and didn’t visit....
Instead of wanting to clear his name....Dennis (and his mom) should be yelling loud and clear that the killer is still loose.
Haven’t heard that...




Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10