CANADA Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 - #1
- Thread starter Dedpanman
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
- Status
matou
#los2188
- Joined
- May 11, 2009
- Messages
- 20,149
- Reaction score
- 2,532
That wording is so difficult to understand. Were not connected to the rest of her body? To each other? (which would never make sense) Her WAIST was not connected? What is that supposed to mean? The waist isn't a bone at all.
Fred Patterson and Bernie Fitzpatrick are not quoted anywhere saying her head was between her legs. They both saw socks on her feet - neither said the sweaters/blouse etc were in between the socks. BF is quoted in RR as the ball of clothing was off to the side.
Not yet verified info., but the head was referred to in this post.
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - CANADA Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville ON, 3 October 1984 UNSOLVED
Bbm.Not sure if this is a known fact.
Found sitting up is not a fact described or reported anywhere.
It isn't possible to make an unconscious person sit up - pretty sure the same is true for a deceased person. Rigor comes and goes. Christine is not described as being held in a sitting position with anything - rocks etc.
Christine is likely to have been spotted sooner by FP (walked the property about 4 times prior to discovery) if in a sitting position.
Decapitation is also described as an attempt at decapitation from the back of the neck and was unsuccessful - disarticulation of the neck bones would happen in conjunction with disarticulation of the upper torso bones. This falls in line with BF description of the balled clothing off to one side.
It isn't possible to make an unconscious person sit up - pretty sure the same is true for a deceased person. Rigor comes and goes. Christine is not described as being held in a sitting position with anything - rocks etc.
Christine is likely to have been spotted sooner by FP (walked the property about 4 times prior to discovery) if in a sitting position.
Decapitation is also described as an attempt at decapitation from the back of the neck and was unsuccessful - disarticulation of the neck bones would happen in conjunction with disarticulation of the upper torso bones. This falls in line with BF description of the balled clothing off to one side.
Above is a portion of post #84 on page 4.
Neale Tweedy describes Christine as nearly decapitated and left lying on her back. While Tweedy is not my favorite character in this saga, he was going for the shock effect to help put a DNA database in place. If there were any other gruesome details in how she was left, I think he would have included them - he was not anticipating in 1998 that this would someday be available on the internet.
The sentence following that which is bolded by Dotr:
<modnsip>
Perhaps that is what is meant by found sitting up?
I don't know if the Jessop family were present when police collected the remains, however I would imagine the family would have been notified and been present at the place Christine's remains were taken to. Whatever they saw or were told by investigating officers may be entirely different than most of what was printed in media. It is often the case.
Christine was tiny, and several pages back, Dedpanman described the weed growth in the area as quite tall.
<modnsip>
I don't recall Janet Jessop's or KJessop's memory being questioned here at any time - the questions come from information presented by various sources - some of that information is often questioned.
When information from various sources has consistencies then it lends some credibility - the reader has to decide what they believe or are willing to believe.
Discrediting someone is not what is being posted here - it's the information. To say one perceives nuances to discredit someone is pretty strong - and it's just that, a perception. A question should be posed to request clarification.
When information from various sources has consistencies then it lends some credibility - the reader has to decide what they believe or are willing to believe.
Discrediting someone is not what is being posted here - it's the information. To say one perceives nuances to discredit someone is pretty strong - and it's just that, a perception. A question should be posed to request clarification.
Information from various sources can be doctored as well. We have seen many errors, which prove to be errors later, on various cases. So I also am leery about taking for granted all that is reported. Most media say the same thing, just use different wording and it doesn't mean it is totally credible.
Marikesh - many here question media reports and the poster says they are doing that. I believe that is part of the process here. By the same token, comparing a comment made by an individual with no back-up is equally important.
I was hoping for an answer to the strong statement 'nuances to discredit what he says (KJessop) throughout these posts' - meaning posts on WS. It was not posed as a question so came across in a negative way.
Which posts question the memory of Janet Jessop and KJessop?
I agree no one seemed bothered by JJ recent interview - unsure why anyone would question that. Another book written outside the family? - what is the relevance to Christine being found prone or sitting up?
I was hoping for an answer to the strong statement 'nuances to discredit what he says (KJessop) throughout these posts' - meaning posts on WS. It was not posed as a question so came across in a negative way.
Which posts question the memory of Janet Jessop and KJessop?
I agree no one seemed bothered by JJ recent interview - unsure why anyone would question that. Another book written outside the family? - what is the relevance to Christine being found prone or sitting up?
No way intend this to disrespect anyone's hard sleuthing here but I am somewhat sceptical of the value of our emphasis on the minutiae of the crime scene in particular as this now seems to some extent to be beyond certainty. One thing is obvious: Christine was mistreated unspeakably by someone and obviously she was posed in some manner but finding out how she was posed and what exactly was done to her let alone why - this seems unlikely to lead us to the killer (?).
I can understand if we are trying to link up cases but I haven't heard it suggested that this is likely to be possible since similar cases don't seem to have surfaced (?).
But I think maybe I am missing something if someone can explain.
(For example I think Dotr's "theory" of the head in a sweater between the legs as a birthing/swaddling gesture is brilliant but then we run into the fact that we don't know if it was found that way. Actually years ago I had heard that her head was impaled on a stick which I realize is not the case).
I can understand if we are trying to link up cases but I haven't heard it suggested that this is likely to be possible since similar cases don't seem to have surfaced (?).
But I think maybe I am missing something if someone can explain.
(For example I think Dotr's "theory" of the head in a sweater between the legs as a birthing/swaddling gesture is brilliant but then we run into the fact that we don't know if it was found that way. Actually years ago I had heard that her head was impaled on a stick which I realize is not the case).
Just to add but separately:
Is there evidence of a cover-up? If the answer to that is yes then following the trail of the cover-up could be the quickest root to the killer since a cover-up suggests the perp is actually known ....to somebody. Of course we are waiting for KJ's status to be verified but some of what he has said has been challenged e.g. the fact about the stop light. I think he has a piece of the truth though. I have always thought it likely there is a link between the abuse meted out to KJ and CJ (even if simulated sex is what happened) and the final crime. It is just overwhelmingly likely from a logical point of view. I do think we are dealing with a group not a single deranged passerby and as Dotr suggested way back (hope I have this right) there might be a link to Sharin Keenan in terms of milieau if not actual perp. I think it is possible to overfocus on the DNA though of course it is important. Yes there might be two perps ........or 30.
One thing those two cases might have in common: were they both going to "tell"?
Is there evidence of a cover-up? If the answer to that is yes then following the trail of the cover-up could be the quickest root to the killer since a cover-up suggests the perp is actually known ....to somebody. Of course we are waiting for KJ's status to be verified but some of what he has said has been challenged e.g. the fact about the stop light. I think he has a piece of the truth though. I have always thought it likely there is a link between the abuse meted out to KJ and CJ (even if simulated sex is what happened) and the final crime. It is just overwhelmingly likely from a logical point of view. I do think we are dealing with a group not a single deranged passerby and as Dotr suggested way back (hope I have this right) there might be a link to Sharin Keenan in terms of milieau if not actual perp. I think it is possible to overfocus on the DNA though of course it is important. Yes there might be two perps ........or 30.
One thing those two cases might have in common: were they both going to "tell"?
Imo, the value in keeping with information that can be verified (whether one believes it or not) is keeping the unsubstantiated information out of the thread.
What would be the point in having many items posted here that have no source for the origin? As in her head impaled on a stick?
Each minutiae point is a part of the big picture.
What would be the point in having many items posted here that have no source for the origin? As in her head impaled on a stick?
Each minutiae point is a part of the big picture.
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 214
Marikesh - I believe that the bones KJessop is referring to here are the ones he found when he and his parents went back to the site long after the police were done. These are the bones that he collected and put into a styrofoam cup and took to the Sunderland police station. They went there because KJessop was having dreams that the police had missed things, and that his sister was not complete in her grave.
I am not sure why the second discovery of bones is treated so easily here as a kind of miracle. I don't think is shows madness but it shows...knowledge.
Also when intimates of a case post or appear to it is worth a look at the immediate discussion and posts to see what prompted their sudden clubbing or even intervention.
I don't think it is the discussion of the minutiae of the crime scene. I think it might be any kind of discussion that brings things closer to home hence the admonitions to focus on the ultimate crime scene in instead. As I have said I think the pile of bones is religious in character I mean religious in the broadest sense and expiatory.
The info about Det. O. and the sons of is crucial though since it links up crimes and probably coverups. IMO the perp is known in the CJ case and unknown in the SMK case even if LE claim it is known in the latter but that per is a construction, a cipher IMO.
Also when intimates of a case post or appear to it is worth a look at the immediate discussion and posts to see what prompted their sudden clubbing or even intervention.
I don't think it is the discussion of the minutiae of the crime scene. I think it might be any kind of discussion that brings things closer to home hence the admonitions to focus on the ultimate crime scene in instead. As I have said I think the pile of bones is religious in character I mean religious in the broadest sense and expiatory.
The info about Det. O. and the sons of is crucial though since it links up crimes and probably coverups. IMO the perp is known in the CJ case and unknown in the SMK case even if LE claim it is known in the latter but that per is a construction, a cipher IMO.
Not to get carried away with this but the overall context of this type of severe crime and the inability to solve them has an overall context which might be found more easily in the history in Ontario and Canada of organized crime against children in the residential schools e.g. in Brantford. From the aboriginal viewpoint there are "killing fields" in Ontario and elsewhere. Obviously the abuse extends throughout other orgs. like Scouting and figure skating and religious orgs. majorly Catholic and Anglican (for Ontario) but others too including protector agencies for perps in gov. agencies including police and schools like UCC.
That is why we have to be cautious about using media and books what are basically unprofessional books by crime writers as "sources" - I realize on WS we have little choice because we don't have access to police files but they are not "sources" that would past the muster of even academic writing.
Poring over the conflicting data of injuries to CJ leads nowhere at this point IMO because of the extraordinary amount of overkill that doesn't point to any plausible suspect we know of including Kjessop's suspect. I mean it is interesting but I think it is leading away from the discovery of the probably very plural perps.
That is why we have to be cautious about using media and books what are basically unprofessional books by crime writers as "sources" - I realize on WS we have little choice because we don't have access to police files but they are not "sources" that would past the muster of even academic writing.
Poring over the conflicting data of injuries to CJ leads nowhere at this point IMO because of the extraordinary amount of overkill that doesn't point to any plausible suspect we know of including Kjessop's suspect. I mean it is interesting but I think it is leading away from the discovery of the probably very plural perps.
- Status