ARRESTED- Luka Rocco Magnotta:1st deg murder charge;INTERPOL alert #6

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Great find! Had not seen those before.

It is really insane at how much this guy put himself all over the place online. I've found Youtube channels where literally his various personas are all agreeing with each other about Luka. It is like schizophrenia captured in text.

This is why it irritates me when people like the Xtra reporter refer to LRM's "white supremacist" link just because he poste on the Stormfront forums. That's either poor analytical ability or intentionally buying into sensationalism.

LRM'S posted on TONS of popular message boards. He was on bodybuilding.com, the psych forums, DU, aLl those YouTube discussions, about.com, and many more. He went anywhere he could get in front of large amounts of readers, and where he thought he could most effectively leave his trail of bread crumbs.
 
I totally agree. Timeline is important. But the fact that he logged onto his computer at 8:54 am on the morning of the 24th is not an important detail as it is known he showed up at his job later in the day, left it around 5pm AND communicated with his friends up to 9pm. This is known. Lets put our efforts into shoaring what has yet to be discovered.

And, may I add that the police went to Lin Jun's apartment and removed his computer, so I am sure all relevant clues to be found in his online activities are being followed already by LE.
 
800_jun_lin_cp_120601.jpg


This is the image that should be all over the internet, not that grisly product of Luka's sick mind.
 
I don't think anybody has a right to watch somebody else's murder, or the desecration of a murder victim's corpse by the killer. There is no larger issue of freedom here, the rights that are paramount are those of Jun Lin and his family. This video revictimises those people every time its watched, and those websites hosting it should be prosecuted for it.

Or to put it another way, your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose.
Thank you. I absolutely agree.

I feel one has as much 'right' to watch this video as they have the 'right' to view child *advertiser censored* for it's 'entertainment value'.

Sickening.
 
I would probably agree but there was no murder to watch on that video so that point is moot.

Read the post again, especially the part about desecrating the corpse of a murder victim.
 
I don't know if any of this is relevant, but Jun was online with various names,I've been doing a thorough research for the past 5 hrs or so, I don't know if I'm allowed to post them here though?
 
I'm a few pages behind so forgive me if this is posted already

http://laist.com/2012/06/04/is_the_canadian_cannibal_killer_beh.php

It says a few things that make me think he's connected to the hollywood hills case that I didn't know.

The hollywood case had hands found nearby, and also the victim was homosexual. It also says Luka was in LA within at least a month of the killing per a post on facebookl

But - not sure the sources. Makes me very likely to believe the connection if true.

Again, sorry if duplicate post.
 
I don't know if any of this is relevant, but Jun was online with various names,I've been doing a thorough research for the past 5 hrs or so, I don't know if I'm allowed to post them here though?

Does anyone else find this online sleuthing of the VICTIM as objectionable as I do? The police are in possession of his computer and I am sure are doing their work regarding his online activities. Is these a valid reason we need to be making public his secrets?
 
I would probably agree but there was no murder to watch on that video so that point is moot. If you think that the rights of one family and their pain outweighs the larger issue of freedom and the very notion of a FREE SOCIETY then well we wont be agreeing on much, I just cant bring myself to see the world that way. It may be cold and heartless to some but to others who understand the larger issue it is the only way.

Absolute nonsense. The rights which come first here are those which are most important - the victim. Jun Lin did not consent to be in that video, nor to have those sick acts performed on his corpse and viewed by all and sundry. You don't have the right to over ride his lack of consent, any more than you have the "right" to rape someone, or view child *advertiser censored*.

There is no such thing as an absolute freedom, and no amount of patronisation about the "larger issue" will change that. The line has to be drawn somewhere and this particular video is on the unacceptable side of the line. Not just to those of us using our hearts, but to those of us using our heads too.
 
Does anyone else find this online sleuthing of the VICTIM as objectionable as I do? The police are ibn possession of his computer and I am sure are doing their work regardning his online activities. Is these a valid reason we need to be making public his secrets?

Not to me. Im more like a cop a lead is a lead. check out all that is available.
 
CBC news: Police stating that the parts were wrapped in plastic and then sent to Ottawa. Police are saying that the time for parcels to arrive would be ending now and that they don`t think the head was mailed (or other parts sent in the mail).

I dunno - first LE said they didn't think there were any more parts in the mail after the initial discoveries and they were wrong. Then it took Canada Post TWO WEEKS to get the rest of the parts to Vancouver. I'm personally not convinced that nothing else will show up in the mail. Although one poster previously made a good point about how heavy the head would be and the cost to ship it.

I'd still like to know where that backpack is the woman said he had with him when she picked him up hitchhiking...

Either way, for the sake of the family, I hope they locate the head. I think the only thing worse than having it turn up would be the family wondering forever what happened to it.
 
The rights and wrongs of the hosting of the video both have good arguments but I'm not sure I can agree with those who feel it should be banned. If that was the case then should all footage of the JFK assassination also be removed from places such as youtube as this shows an innocent man literally having his brains blown out whilst sitting beside his wife?

Is it wrong for people to watch that also? Or is there a fundamental difference between the death of a powerful man and the death of an ordinary man?

For the record I haven't seen the video and have no interest in seeing it but I am almost certain that if that video was not released Magnotta would be still walking the streets now. It ensured the international interest in the case and without it that internet cafe worker would not have thought twice about some random Canadian tourist just looking to use a computer.
 
I don't see the evil in his pictures post arrest. I don't see anything. I think without someone to mimic and an idol to imitate, Luka will turn out to be quite the blob. Not really any real personality of his own to be seen.

It cracks me up that his lawyer says he is nice and polite and looks nothing like a psychopath. There's a video she should watch..
I wonder what she thinks a psychopath looks like. i hope that no one is fooled or charmed by the act.

May be right, just an empty shell now, but still capable of doing what he's done if he is ever free again, because to commit the atrocities he committed he has no goodness, no conscience, certainly no empathy for others in his heart or being.
Makes me think of the movie "Fallen" with John Goodman and Denzel Washington, where the evil spirit moves around from person to person. So maybe the "demon" in this sicko just moved on. After all, can't be much fun for an evil spirit if it's locked up behind bars. jmo
 
I dont like it either but if you read and understand what I am saying this is not about arguing in favor of some video, there is a larger issue here and we are at a TIME right now where our leaders are doing everything they can to censor the internet, have you read some of the recent legislation that would allow such. Support for the ban of ANY WEBSITE would only give them the legal precedent they would need to go behind the voters backs and do whatever they want and there is no way I can rightfully support that mostly because I have taken the time to consider what the world may look like if we began to go down that road, I would suggest others take the time to do so also but you have to set aside your emotions and the fact that you are upset about what happened to LIN (I am too, trust me I am repulsed by this whole case), you cant make decisions like this when you are emotionally invested and thinking irrationally.

A slippery slope argument followed by a patronising comment about my alleged lack of ability to think rationally.

That won't wash. Any legislature worth its salt should be able to outlaw videos of this nature without infringing on further freedoms, just as they have been able to outlaw child *advertiser censored* without criminalising all *advertiser censored*, or just as they have been able to outlaw rape without criminalising all sexual acts.

If you don't have such a legislature in Canada then maybe you should vote one in.
 
Absolute nonsense. The rights which come first here are those which are most important - the victim. Jun Lin did not consent to be in that video, nor to have those sick acts performed on his corpse and viewed by all and sundry. You don't have the right to over ride his lack of consent, any more than you have the "right" to rape someone, or view child *advertiser censored*.

There is no such thing as an absolute freedom, and no amount of patronisation about the "larger issue" will change that. The line has to be drawn somewhere and this particular video is on the unacceptable side of the line. Not just to those of us using our hearts, but to those of us using our heads too.

Im not sure if that is a road you want to go down - rights imposed by the govt. Because the very people whom you want to control the freedoms and rights of people are the very people who have made VIEWING CHILD *advertiser censored* LEGAL.

You sure you want the govt in control of morals and the rights of people??? Because I dont think they have YOUR same moral code....or mine....or the next persons....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...ensored*-possession-james-kent_n_1505916.html


It is now not illegal to view child *advertiser censored* on the internet in New York.

The state's Court Of Appeals ruled Tuesday that simply looking at child *advertiser censored* online does not constitute criminal possession or procurement of the images.

so since we CANNOT depend on the Govt nor should we.....we are left with what? Self responsability.


....wonder which states will follow....
 
So the big picture is not that Canadians wont tolerate it but rather that certain Canadians, typically the ones who are intolerant of just about anything that they dont like or agree with including homosexuality, a woman's right to choose and other controversial issues, do not tolerate it. And that is really no surprise as they are usually the same people who are trying to tell everyone else how they should live, what they should like and what they should be allowed to do in the privacy of their bedrooms. Fortunately for them, there is the rest of us, who work tirelessly to fight for the right for people to believe whatever they want and to express those beliefs so that even if we dont agree with intolerance we fight for them to have the right to be intolerant anyway.

Come on. To desire that a video depicting the brutal murder and degradation of an innocent victim -- an invasion of rights of the very grossest kind -- not be available to be freely enjoyed in the privacy of one's bedroom is surely not the expression of some crude nanny-state intolerance. It isn't a question of freedom of expression, artistic licence or reproductive or other bodily rights. It's rank voyeurism, and the reason you're able to watch it (arguing a point, not setting out my own personal tent posts here) is through the fruit of another's criminal action. And what then distinguishes the distribution of videos of the violent murder and abuse of this victim from the violent murder and abuse of infants or elders or veterans or anyone else?

I have no doubt you work tirelessly as you say you do to ensure freedoms. But this is not in my view a slippery-slope argument; deciding that we as a society don't endorse the murder of persons or animals for the home-viewing pleasure of others is minimally prescriptive, to my mind, and unlikely to seriously impact the fundamental rights of freedom-loving persons like yourself, and myself, come to that. To link being anti-snuff movie to being anti-abortion, anti-equity or anti-anything that really matters is to argue speciously and uncharitably.

IMO

s
 
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/06/former-schools-not-worried-about-magnotta-mail
“He hasn’t been here in 20 years,” principal Peter Sellenkowitsch of Charlottetown Junior Public School said Wednesday. Magnotta, 29, attended grades five and six at Charlottetown.

“We have no concerns,” added Sellenkowitsch. “Everything comes into our office and if I have a concern over something I’ll address it, but nothing suspicious has come in.”

"Magnotta also attended high school in Toronto, where he was enrolled at Sir Oliver Mowat Collegiate Institute.

Mowat Principal Tom Lazarou said exams are just a week away and he’s more concerned with preparing his students than worrying Magnotta picked his school for a grisly delivery"
 
stop argueing about it if should be online or not.. the fact remains its online and its never going to be removed. its impossible!

this isnt the place for a political debate, start its own thread if you want
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
197
Guests online
3,528
Total visitors
3,725

Forum statistics

Threads
604,581
Messages
18,174,002
Members
232,703
Latest member
CR4BBI3
Back
Top