Author Topic: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John  (Read 486457 times)

RubyRose

  • Member
  • Posts: 643
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1560 on: September 23, 2016, 04:30:05 PM »

I too have felt that this should apply across the country.  But, I agree that one would have to be careful as to whom this should apply to. I think some criminals will win - who should have lost - and those who should win - will still sit in jail.  Depending upon the expertise of his or lawyer. 

Dates to watch for -/jb

Arguments on bail issue  are scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court on Oct. 31.

Meanwhile, Oland's appeal of his conviction is scheduled to be heard by the New Brunswick Court of Appeal on Oct. 18 to 20.


I agree with both you and Have Faith, jellybean.  Sad to say, I'm afraid I'm cynical enough to believe exactly what you say about the winners and losers, though.  On balance, though, it may still be better than the system as it presently exists.  At least it should be much more clearly defined.

RubyRose

  • Member
  • Posts: 643
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1561 on: September 23, 2016, 04:34:34 PM »

Big oops, please excuse me as I slink off into the wings on this one.  :-[  I am very sorry about that. Please accept my apology.

BaySailor

That's alright, BaySailor.  No apology necessary.  I just wanted to clarify.


jellybean

  • Member
  • Posts: 8207
  • Tired of Crime not doing their time
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1562 on: September 23, 2016, 04:39:43 PM »
Right on Ruby Rose - clearly defined that is paramount.

I am cynical as well --- I hope this does not open the floodgates of murderers getting bail, until their appeal.  Only special circumstances should apply and the criteria should be set very high.
Money and power should not be one of them. These two things should always be set aside.
jb
« Last Edit: September 23, 2016, 04:44:07 PM by jellybean »

jellybean

  • Member
  • Posts: 8207
  • Tired of Crime not doing their time
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1563 on: October 06, 2016, 05:03:07 PM »
This was a foregone conclusion!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/saint-john-deputy-chief-mccloskey-dennis-oland-1.3789332

Saint John deputy chief cleared of criminal wrongdoing in Dennis Oland case
Halifax police have concluded investigation of Glen McCloskey related to allegations of 'witness tampering'

By Bobbi-Jean MacKinnon, CBC News Posted: Oct 03, 2016 5:54 PM AT Last Updated: Oct 03, 2016 9:50 PM AT

Saint John Police Force Deputy Chief Glen McCloskey has been cleared of any criminal wrongdoing in connection with the murder trial of Dennis Oland.

Halifax Regional Police has concluded its eight-month investigation, which included consultation with the Nova Scotia public prosecutions service, according to a release from the Saint John police early Monday evening.

McCloskey, a 27-year veteran, who served as the acting chief for about six months last year, had been accused of "for lack of a better choice of words, sort of a witness tampering," Saint John Chief John Bates had previously said.

"There was no evidence to support charges being laid in this matter," the statement from spokesman Sgt. Chuck Breen said.

McCloskey is still facing an investigation into his conduct by the New Brunswick Police Commission under the provincial Police Act and will not be offering any comments, according to the chief.

"​I think you'll agree it is prudent; the Oland matter remains active‎ in the courts and the deputy was and remains a potential witness," Bates said in an email to CBC News.

Have faith

  • Member
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1564 on: October 16, 2016, 05:41:26 PM »
For anyone interested, the Court of Appeal proceedings will be live-streamed at www.CBC.ca/nb, starting on Tuesday.

http://www.cp24.com/news/oland-lawyers-launch-attack-on-house-of-cards-murder-conviction-1.3117342


Kevin Bissett, The Canadian Press
Published Sunday, October 16, 2016 12:43PM EDT
FREDERICTON -- It was one of the longest murder trials in New Brunswick history, involving one of the Maritimes' most prominent families.
Dennis Oland, a financial planner and member of the family that owns Moosehead Breweries, was convicted in December of killing his millionaire father Richard Oland based on a "house of cards" of circumstantial evidence.
On Tuesday, Oland's lawyers will try to pull apart that house of cards, and ask the Court of Appeal to overturn the verdict.
His lawyers say the trial judge made multiple errors in his instructions to the jury, citing his decision to admit certain pieces of evidence -- including some cell phone records and the results of forensic testing on Oland's brown Hugo Boss sports jacket.
Found on that jacket: A number of minuscule blood stains and DNA that matched the profile of Richard Oland.
The elder Oland, a well-known New Brunswick businessman, was found face down in a pool of blood on the floor of his Saint John office on July 7, 2011. He had suffered 45 blunt and sharp force blows to his head, neck and hands, although no murder weapon was ever found.
"The forensic testing was not authorized by the search warrant," defence lawyers wrote in their submission to the Court of Appeal.
They also argues the jacket was tested outside New Brunswick, which "violated the express terms of judicial orders requiring it to be detained in the custody of the (Saint John Police Force) in the City of Saint John."
They argue the testing violated Oland's Charter rights against unreasonable search or seizure, and all the evidence from it should have been excluded.
None of the expert witnesses could say how long the blood had been on the brown jacket or how it got there. Others testified that the killer likely would have considerable blood spatter on his or her clothes, based on the amount of spatter at the crime scene.
No blood evidence was found on any other articles of Oland's clothing, his car, home or cell phone.
Dennis Oland had told police he was wearing a navy blazer when he went to visit his father on the day he was killed, but security camera video showed him wearing the brown jacket.
The defence also alleges the trial judge erred by admitting cell phone records which purported to show Richard Oland's missing iPhone "pinged" off a tower east of the city at 6:44 p.m., after Dennis left his father's office. The defence will argue that's a piece of evidence unconnected to any other aspect of the case.
"But because it references a cell tower in the same general direction that (Dennis Oland) travelled it invites an unfair inculpatory inference simply because 'coincidence' has a pejorative connotation," the defence wrote.
Nicole O'Byrne, a law professor at the University of New Brunswick, said a trial that is based mainly on circumstantial evidence is like a "house of cards."
"Every card that goes in builds the narrative or builds the story, and that's what the jury is assessing with respect to credibility or what the meaning of each particular piece of evidence is in the context. If you take out a couple of those pieces of cards, the whole house of cards might come crashing down," she said.
Throughout the trial the Crown focused on possible motives, including Dennis Oland's serious financial difficulties and the knowledge that his father was having an affair. They suggested Oland may have killed his father in a fit of rage.
But in his own testimony, Oland downplayed his finances, and said he had not discussed his finances or the affair with his father when they met at his office to discuss research into their family history.
The defence is asking that the court allow the appeal, quash the conviction and direct a verdict of acquittal, or order a new trial.
The Crown, meanwhile, stands by its case and is asking for the appeal to be dismissed.
"Despite (Dennis Oland's) suggestions otherwise, the case against him was not a house of cards waiting to fall, but a structure based on strong evidential foundation," the Crown wrote in its submission.
The appeal begins Tuesday morning. Three days have been set aside to hear the arguments.
A second Oland appeal will go this month to the Supreme Court of Canada, as he seeks release pending his conviction appeal. That request has already been denied by two lower courts.
Oland has been sentenced to life in prison with no eligibility for parole for at least 10 years. According to court documents, he is currently serving his sentence at the Atlantic Institution in Renous, N.B.

jellybean

  • Member
  • Posts: 8207
  • Tired of Crime not doing their time
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1565 on: October 16, 2016, 05:51:22 PM »
Thank you Have faith.  So - let's see, it is Tuesday the appeal to throw out the verdict?

Somewhat confusing - if that is correct.  As Supreme Court to rule on bail pending a re-trial.

Is that correct?

The institution is Maximum Security.  Good grief.  I don't think Dennis needs that type of imprisonment. lmo

jb

Have faith

  • Member
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1566 on: October 16, 2016, 07:01:13 PM »
I want to reiterate, that the fact that Oland's brown jacket was apparently seized illegally in the search warrant, and that it was sent out of province to be tested when it shouldn't have been, has no bearing on why I feel that there was enough cause for "reasonable doubt" in his guilt. I would be enraged to see a guilty person get off due to a legal technicality or innocent, inept errors made by LE.

The following excerpt lists the most significant grounds which should have caused "reasonable doubt" that Dennis was able  to slaughter his father in a blood spattered, horrific, gory crime scene, mere minutes before he was captured on a surveillance camera, with no sign of blood on him. This is pure logic that he would have been covered in blood, or at the least, it would have been clearly visible. There is the other significant witness evidence by the two men who heard the sounds when Richard was being killed, that could have cleared Dennis outright, but was discounted when one witness changed his testimony re the time it happened from his statements to police the next day after the murder, and from his same testimony at the pretrial. I don't consider him as credible as his friend who never deviated from his account. And as far as the tiny spots of blood on the brown jacket...

"None of the expert witnesses could say how long the blood had been on the brown jacket or how it got there. Others testified that the killer likely would have considerable blood spatter on his or her clothes, based on the amount of spatter at the crime scene.
No blood evidence was found on any other articles of Oland's clothing, his car, home or cell phone."

http://www.cp24.com/news/oland-lawyers-launch-attack-on-house-of-cards-murder-conviction-1.3117342








Have faith

  • Member
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1567 on: October 16, 2016, 07:07:20 PM »
Thank you Have faith.  So - let's see, it is Tuesday the appeal to throw out the verdict?

Somewhat confusing - if that is correct.  As Supreme Court to rule on bail pending a re-trial.

Is that correct?

The institution is Maximum Security.  Good grief.  I don't think Dennis needs that type of imprisonment. lmo

jb

Yes this is the appeal to overturn the verdict, or order a new trial. The bail appeal comes later.

BaySailor

  • Member
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1568 on: October 21, 2016, 07:35:39 PM »
Thank you Have faith.  So - let's see, it is Tuesday the appeal to throw out the verdict?

Somewhat confusing - if that is correct.  As Supreme Court to rule on bail pending a re-trial.

Is that correct?

The institution is Maximum Security.  Good grief.  I don't think Dennis needs that type of imprisonment. lmo

jb

Yes this is the appeal to overturn the verdict, or order a new trial. The bail appeal comes later.

currently scheduled for Oct. 31

BaySailor

  • Member
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1569 on: October 21, 2016, 08:03:32 PM »
I want to reiterate, that the fact that Oland's brown jacket was apparently seized illegally in the search warrant, and that it was sent out of province to be tested when it shouldn't have been, has no bearing on why I feel that there was enough cause for "reasonable doubt" in his guilt. I would be enraged to see a guilty person get off due to a legal technicality or innocent, inept errors made by LE.

The following excerpt lists the most significant grounds which should have caused "reasonable doubt" that Dennis was able  to slaughter his father in a blood spattered, horrific, gory crime scene, mere minutes before he was captured on a surveillance camera, with no sign of blood on him. This is pure logic that he would have been covered in blood, or at the least, it would have been clearly visible. There is the other significant witness evidence by the two men who heard the sounds when Richard was being killed, that could have cleared Dennis outright, but was discounted when one witness changed his testimony re the time it happened from his statements to police the next day after the murder, and from his same testimony at the pretrial. I don't consider him as credible as his friend who never deviated from his account. And as far as the tiny spots of blood on the brown jacket...

"None of the expert witnesses could say how long the blood had been on the brown jacket or how it got there. Others testified that the killer likely would have considerable blood spatter on his or her clothes, based on the amount of spatter at the crime scene.
No blood evidence was found on any other articles of Oland's clothing, his car, home or cell phone."

http://www.cp24.com/news/oland-lawyers-launch-attack-on-house-of-cards-murder-conviction-1.3117342

The Court didn't even bother to hear the prosecutions case for the evidentiary value of the jacket; they listened to the defenses objections and determined that they did not need to hear the prosecutions rebuttal. I would think that means the Court felt the defence argument was not sufficient to overturn the trial judges ruling on that evidence as otherwise they would surely have let the prosecution have their say.

The Chief Justice's comments lead to me believe that their sticking point in making a decision is Dennis's behavior after his father's death. After day 1 in the Appeals Court the trial judges instructions to the jury appeared to be an issue for the Chief Justice but he later said he been convinced otherwise to some degree by the prosecutions rebuttal of that concern, perhaps allayed by the fact that the prosecution and defense sat with the trial judge for hours on different occasions to help the judge create his instructions to the jury.

The fact we did not hear a decision rendered immediately is good news for the defence, and I am curious to know what aspects of Dennis's behavior they are considering. His trip to the wharf? The dry cleaning the next day? His normal shopping behavior? I wonder...     

I was surprised at the nervousness shown by both Gold and the Prosecutor this week when speaking. I would have thought they had both done this often enough to be comfortable talking to judges but by times they stuttered, stopped and restarted sentences, and the prosecutor giggled nervously frequently when making points. Apparently Provincial Supreme Court is nerve wracking, even for the pros.     

jellybean

  • Member
  • Posts: 8207
  • Tired of Crime not doing their time
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1570 on: October 21, 2016, 10:12:01 PM »
appeal decision expected this coming Monday. Oct 31st/jb

Yes, Baysailor, I wonder why the judges are fascinated with Dennis post offense behaviour?
Could it be taking the brown jacket to the dry cleaners?  Just guessing, as I can no longer recall any unusual behaviour after the killing.
Those who saw the appeal live had a good "front seat".  So much is at stake here, and no wonder the lawyers on both sides were nervous. 

Here is CTV's take on the appeal.

 http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/decision-in-appeal-of-dennis-oland-s-murder-conviction-expected-monday-1.3123276

Decision in appeal of Dennis Oland's murder conviction expected Monday


Kevin Bissett, The Canadian Press
Published Thursday, October 20, 2016 8:53AM EDT

Last Updated Thursday, October 20, 2016 4:46PM EDT

FREDERICTON -- Dennis Oland is expected to learn Monday if he'll continue to serve a life sentence for the murder of his father, win acquittal, or be ordered to stand trial all over again.

Defence and Crown lawyers finished presenting arguments before three justices of New Brunswick's Court of Appeal Thursday on whether the guilty verdict delivered by a jury in December should stand or be overturned.

Oland's lawyers argued that the verdict was unreasonable, that the trial judge made errors in his instructions to the jury, and by allowing the introduction of some pieces of evidence such as Oland's brown sports jacket.
RELATED STORIES
Appeal of Dennis Oland's conviction for dad's murder

Dennis Oland's lawyer says 'mistake' about jacket not a sign of guilt

Much of the three-day hearing focused on Dennis Oland's incorrect statement that he was wearing a navy blazer on the evening his father was murdered.

During the lengthy trial last year, the Crown portrayed the statement to police as an intentional lie, while the defence said it was an honest mistake.

The brown jacket Oland was actually wearing was later found to have minuscule blood stains and DNA matching the profile of Oland's father, Richard.

Oland's lawyer argued the trial judge erred in his instructions to the jury on how to view the incorrect statement about the colour of the jacket.

Alan Gold cited numerous examples of case law where he said independent evidence is necessary to prove whether an incorrect statement is a lie. He said that independent evidence didn't exist during Oland's trial and the judge failed to properly instruct the jury.

Crown prosecutor Kathryn Gregory said she believes the judge's charge was correct by allowing the jury to weigh all of the evidence. She said even if there was an error, it wouldn't diminish the case against Oland.

"It's the Crown's position that if the trial judge did make an error in relation to his charge it was a harmless error. The evidence in relation to the statement was not a critical aspect of this case. It related to the colour of his jacket, but it did not go to the ultimate question," she told the court Thursday.

But Chief Justice Ernest Drapeau took issue with her statement on Thursday.

"I have a hard time accepting that a lie about the jacket worn the day of the visit at Oland's office, and then the jacket is analyzed and DNA of Oland senior is found on that jacket -- that, that is somehow an inconsequential piece of evidence," he said.

Gold referred to the statement about the jacket as "a linchpin" to the Crown's case. He said without it, the Crown's case falls apart, and a new trial need to be ordered.

Drapeau said he and the other two justices on the appeal panel are having difficulty dealing with the issue of Dennis Oland's post-offence conduct, but he said they are keeping an open mind.

The badly beaten body of well-known multimillionaire Richard Oland was found in his Saint John office on July 7, 2011.

He had suffered 45 blunt and sharp-force blows to his head, neck and hands. No murder weapon was ever found.

Dennis Oland, 48, was convicted and sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for at least 10 years.

Gold has argued that the Crown in the trial went too far by speculating to the jury about what he believed happened on the night that Richard Oland was killed.

But on Thursday, Drapeau said he didn't agree.

"I am not persuaded that the Crown counsel at trial engaged in impermissible speculation. There was some evidence in the record that allowed Crown counsel to raise these issues in his summation," Drapeau told the court.

However, Gold said the Crown expressed his personal belief, and in doing so, went too far.

He said the Crown suggested "a hypothetical conversation leading to a murderous rage."
"There's no evidentiary basis that the appellant was even capable of such a thing," Gold said.

Drapeau noted the expense of the lengthy trial and questioned whether cost should be a factor in the appeal court's decision.

"Should we be reticent at ordering a new trial because this was an expensive first trial? Does that come into the equation or should we simply render justice according to law?," he asked.

Gregory said the decision should be made according to the law.

Drapeau said the three judges hope to release their decision, with reasons, on Monday.

They could reject the appeal, order an acquittal, or order a new trial.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2016, 10:16:01 PM by jellybean »

Have faith

  • Member
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1571 on: October 21, 2016, 11:55:40 PM »
BaySailor-I agree that the Court seemed to pass over the defense's arguments re the brown jacket. I was surprised that Chief Justice Drapeau asked both the defense and prosecutor if the jacket was important evidence in finding Oland guilty. I think he was playing devil's advocate because we all know how important this evidence was, and Drapeau later stated he thought it was also.  To paraphrase, Gold said it was devastating to his client, and Gregory said it was no big deal. lol

Although I didn't listen to the actual hearing, I read the daily media blogs, and it is obvious in the blog comments that the "sticking point" is Oland's post-offense behaviour specifically in regard to him telling LE that he wore the navy jacket. This bothers me, because during the LE interview Oland was told that they had surveillance video of him (albeit untrue at that time) and immediately after that statement, asked him what he was wearing. Without hesitation, Oland said the navy jacket, which makes me think that he made a mistake, versus a deceptive lie that would be apparent, since they just told him they had video of what he was wearing. But anyway, the issue seems to be trial Judge Walsh's instructions to the jury in regard to this (an error in law) and also the legal direction in determining if an erroneous statement by an accused denotes guilt or merely an innocent mistake. As you noted BaySailor, Drapeau softened on his concern that Walsh made an error in law, and I concur with your reasoning.

Quote Chief Justice Drapeau:
"A jury must be told that before a false statement can be treated as incriminating evidence there must be a reasonable evidentiary basis for inferring that the statement is not only false, but fabricated and that the accused has been complicit in that fabrication in order to conceal his involvement in the offence."
"I don't see those magical words," in Court of Queen's Bench Justice John Walsh's instructions, said Drapeau. Walsh appears to have done "precisely the opposite," he suggested.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/dennis-oland-murder-appeal-alan-gold-1.3811727

But the very next day, Drapeau states:
"I'm not certain at all that there was an error made in the charge to the jury on that issue. I think that you've made a significant contribution to the evolution of my thinking on that," he told Gregory. "My thoughts on it are not a finished construction and if they were, perhaps we could have rendered the decision today."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/dennis-oland-appeal-murder-richard-decision-1.3808501


This issue is complex--should it be treated as separate (a mistake) and not relative to the case (per the defense) or should it be included with all other evidence.
"Chief Justice Ernest Drapeau said he and his fellow appeal panel justices might have been able to deliver their ruling sooner, but are "struggling" with the "difficult issue" of Oland's "post-offence conduct," referring to his untrue statement to police about what jacket he was wearing when he visited his father the night he was killed.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/dennis-oland-appeal-murder-richard-decision-1.3808501



The Chief Justice did seem to share the defense's argument with the Crown prosecutor's inappropriate"speculation", without proof, as to what happened to cause Dennis to kill his father, but he softened on that issue also.

The defense made Shaw's testimony of the probable time of the murder a big deal (an independent alibi) but I didn't get a good sense from the blogs how the Court reacted to this.

 

Have faith

  • Member
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1572 on: October 21, 2016, 11:58:21 PM »
Oops--didn't see your post JB before I posted.  I'll read it now. :)

jellybean

  • Member
  • Posts: 8207
  • Tired of Crime not doing their time
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1573 on: October 22, 2016, 11:32:39 AM »
The third trip to Dick's office - why didn't the prosecution pursue this in trial ?
- asks Drapeau

Quote
On Wednesday, he asked Gregory why the Crown didn't make use of Oland's surprise testimony about making a third trip to his father's office on July 6, 2011, the night police believe he was killed.

Gregory said it was "simply a decision made" by the trial prosecutors.

Oland originally told police in handwritten and video statements that he went to his father's Far End Corporation office building at 52 Canterbury St., but didn't go in because he realized he forgot some genealogy papers he wanted to discuss with him.

He said he left to retrieve them from his own office, but realized he couldn't access the work elevator without an after-hours key, so he went back to his father's office, they had their visit and he left.

But during his testimony, Oland revealed a third trip. He said he went back again because he realized he forgot an old camp logbook he was supposed to return to his uncle who was visiting from Toronto.

I often wondered about that point not being explored!!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/dennis-oland-appeal-murder-richard-decision-1.3808501


blueriver

  • Member
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: Richard (Dick) Oland | Murdered | 69 | Saint John
« Reply #1574 on: October 22, 2016, 11:36:48 AM »
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?