Someone Knows Something - CBC
Podcast By David Ridgen, an award-winning filmmaker

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
General Discussion / Re: Sex offenders ... several ... released within past year
« Last post by Sap1 on January 13, 2017, 12:19:19 PM »
And another violent offender released. He has curfews etc but I can not see this evil thing say "sure, I will be a nice guy"!!

http://globalnews.ca/news/3178232/convicted-violent-offender-released-set-to-live-in-edmonton-area/

Edmonton police issued a public warning Thursday about convicted violent offender Dean Goulet, 39, who was released and will be living in the area.

“The Edmonton Police Service has reasonable grounds to believe he will commit another violent offence against someone while in the community,” an EPS news release said.

Police did not say what crime Goulet was serving time for in the release.

Goulet will be closely monitored by the Behavioural Assessment Unit, police said.

He has a number of court-ordered conditions, including:

A 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. daily curfew
Must abstain from possessing or consuming alcohol or drugs
Must not go to bars, nightclubs, casinos or anywhere the primary focus is the consumption or sale of alcohol
Must not associate with anyone with a criminal history
Anyone who witnesses Goulet breaching any of these conditions is asked to contact EPS at (780) 423-4567.

Police said the reason they made this information public “is to enable citizens to take suitable precautionary measures. Releasing this information is not intended to encourage people to engage in any form of vigilante action.”

72
London / Re: Jacqueline Dunleavy, 16, - London, ON - Murdered - 1968
« Last post by Have faith on January 12, 2017, 10:33:25 PM »
I am no longer in the loop, but I read on a face book page that a family member of Jackie's had bravely come forward and named a suspect. Apparently his/her post is online, but I haven't been able to find it.  Maybe a UC member will  be more successful in finding it, or somebody in the know will give us a hint for finding it.

Now Galaxygirl says she has "inside information" that LE knew who killed Jackie but they didn't have enough evidence to nail him. All new info we haven't heard before.

 Jackie holds a special place in my heart for personal reasons, and I will never forget her. Nor will I ever forget Frankie Jensen who was taken a month after Jackie.





73
London / Re: Jacqueline Dunleavy, 16, - London, ON - Murdered - 1968
« Last post by chickapey on January 12, 2017, 04:21:59 PM »
Facts First... yes so many people have said nothing was the same after that day.  It seems that it changed the lives of her friends so drastically and most of them never got over it.
JellyBean... a lot of area teenagers knew this spot. It was pretty desolate at the time and especially that time of year. I do wonder though... the row of houses along Sanitorium... most of them would have had a clear view of the road to the school so did the police ever question these people if they saw even the headlights? I always thought it was the boys who found her.... their story just never sat well with me but now I'm not so sure.
74
London / Re: Jacqueline Dunleavy, 16, - London, ON - Murdered - 1968
« Last post by jellybean on January 12, 2017, 04:14:53 PM »
I have often wondered if the killer(s) were actually a couple of teenagers cruising around.
If Jackie knew them from school, surely she would have entered their vehicle.

Being dropped off at a dead end street, by a school, sounds like an area that teenagers would know very well.

JB
75
BaySailor, can you provide the link?  I would like to read it.

Thanks in advance.

I wonder how the courts could call a lie - circumstantial evidence? Do they mean circumstantial evidence for the prosecution towards guilt of the defendant?
And the judge should have instructed the jury that they may consider the lie as circumstantial?  I am being redundant..... confused as well.


JB

the link is here...

https://www.gnb.ca/cour/03COA1/Decisions/2017/January2017/20170112RvOland.pdf

and section  1 [9] details the heart of the reasoning. And to your point, yes, a lie may constitute incriminating evidence if and only if it was concocted to conceal the accused's involvement in the murder AND there is other evidence to show that it was concocted. Notably, instructions must be made to the jury by the judge explaining this. Judge Walsh did not do that.   
76
BaySailor, can you provide the link?  I would like to read it.

Thanks in advance.

I wonder how the courts could call a lie - circumstantial evidence? Do they mean circumstantial evidence for the prosecution towards guilt of the defendant?
And the judge should have instructed the jury that they may consider the lie as circumstantial?  I am being redundant..... confused as well.


JB
77
The NB Court of Appeal has posted on their website their reasoning behind the setting aside of the verdict and the ordering of a new trial. It's simply put and good reading for those that have followed the case. In essence, the verdict was reasonable in their view however the judges instructions around Dennis's misstatement of which jacket he was wearing the day of the murder suggested that the jury could consider the misstatement as circumstantial evidence if they believed it to be a deliberate lie. The Court of Appeal states that the misstatement could only be considered as circumstantial evidence if they believed it to be a deliberate lie AND there was some other evidence suggesting that it was a deliberate lie. The absence of the second part in the Judges instructions is the reason for the setting aside of the verdict. The COA did say the judge got the rules around admissibility of the evidence taken from the jacket correctly, which the Defense had argued vehemently against.
78
Maybe more charges?

                              http://www.680news.com/2017/01/12/police-release-new-information-case-nurse-accused-killing-8-seniors/


                         

            Police to release new information in case of nurse accused of killing 8 seniors

   















by The Canadian Press

Posted Jan 12, 2017 11:18 am EST

Ontario Provincial Police say they will be releasing new information this week in the case of a former nurse accused of killing eight seniors in two long-term care homes.

Sgt. David Rektor says an update on Elizabeth Wettlaufer’s case will come on Friday morning.

Wettlaufer is charged with eight counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of residents at nursing homes in Woodstock, Ont., and London, Ont.

Police allege Wettlaufer used drugs to kill the seniors while she worked at the facilities between 2007 and 2014.

Her alleged victims have been identified as James Silcox, 84, Maurice Granat, 84, Gladys Millard, 87, Helen Matheson, 95, Mary Zurawinski, 96, Helen Young, 90, Maureen Pickering, 79, and Arpad Horvath, 75.

Wettlaufer, 49, is set to appear in person in a Woodstock court on Friday.

Police have said their investigation into the alleged murders was launched in September last year. Wettlaufer was arrested in late October.

Records from the College of Nurses of Ontario show Wettlaufer was first registered as a nurse in August 1995 but resigned Sept. 30, 2016, and is no longer a registered nurse.
79
London / Re: Jacqueline Dunleavy, 16, - London, ON - Murdered - 1968
« Last post by factsfirst on January 09, 2017, 09:23:23 PM »
Just can't let tonight pass without thinking about Jacqueline and a very sad event in the history of London. To a certain generation of Londoners, nothing was ever the same after January 9, 1968. May she rest in peace and may she always be remembered.
80
General Discussion / Re: Just in Case You Need Some Hope Today
« Last post by jellybean on January 08, 2017, 03:46:49 PM »
Great Job.

We have a thread for Alexandria, but did not know that Mr. Big was involved.

http://www.unsolvedcanada.ca/index.php?topic=562.0

JB

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10