CANADA Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 - #1
- Thread starter Dedpanman
- Start date
New Posts
-
GA-Winder-Massive police presence at Apalachee High School.
- Latest: imstilla.grandma
- Status
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 214
Jobo... I agree its impossible to figure out the insect activity that took place back in the fall of 84 but this re-emergence of insects now - this fall of 2012 - indicates that, under the right circumstances, we can have insect activity quite late in the year in southern Ontario well beyond the normal or typical pattern. This has implications for the various, previously-discussed scenarios involving the dumping of CJs body on the Culls property and just when that could have occurred. It adds credence that her body could have been placed there later than early October and could still have been skeletonised by late December.
There fairly heavy insect activity as the falls and early winter of 84 was unseasonably warm. The areas of her body that were cut and such, they could only tell the stub wounds due to nicks on ribs etc. And being almost a marsh explains the lack of blood in the ground 6 years later when ground dig was done, she was found at the bottom of a hill where water drained out of a field. You would not see her from the path.
It was proven by the defences experts, and agreed to by the crowns that she was left there oct 3 1984. Where the brutality was inflicted was skeletal. Both sides agreed.
Quick note. I do not post page and paragraph in my posts as it is my life. I correct what I know is not quite right. In the hope of getting the truth out there. I am already tiring of having every point I make being shot down because "it wasn't in the book" or "it didn't say that in the book". It is a very well written book. It grabs you and holds you. Thats how it was written. To make Makin famous. The trial hadn't even started and the Toronto Star reported he had received a 200k advance on movie rights for the pitch of a wrongfully accused man. He wrote the whole book from that slant. Just as the police ignored evidence of GPM's innocence, makin printed unsubstantiated rumours as fact.
The satanic cult in the first volume... Where did that go!!! It was sensational if true I want to know!
I want the truth to come out about the corruption, lies and coverup. It never will.
If every point I make is questioned with the "truth" of the book, and we keep bickering on unsubstantiated rumors made fact due to being in a book corrected and updated FOUR times due to lawsuits. I am gone.
If you read the pretrial transcript of the second trial you will read the truth about the second autopsy, how she was actually found the agreement about the date she was left there. And that the bones slid off the 4x8 sheet of plywood when trying to carryher out.
Tell me, how is it that the one prosecutor at both trials and in charge of mickolovski's doctored books claims she knew nothing, and such and towed the party line at the inquiry.... BECAME A JUDGE... Makin did a piece about it in the globe.
As long as you keep mired in the miniscule minutia, You miss the true big picture.
Believe what you wish.
Quick note. I do not post page and paragraph in my posts as it is my life. I correct what I know is not quite right. In the hope of getting the truth out there. I am already tiring of having every point I make being shot down because "it wasn't in the book" or "it didn't say that in the book". It is a very well written book. It grabs you and holds you. Thats how it was written. To make Makin famous. The trial hadn't even started and the Toronto Star reported he had received a 200k advance on movie rights for the pitch of a wrongfully accused man. He wrote the whole book from that slant. Just as the police ignored evidence of GPM's innocence, makin printed unsubstantiated rumours as fact.
The satanic cult in the first volume... Where did that go!!! It was sensational if true I want to know!
I want the truth to come out about the corruption, lies and coverup. It never will.
If every point I make is questioned with the "truth" of the book, and we keep bickering on unsubstantiated rumors made fact due to being in a book corrected and updated FOUR times due to lawsuits. I am gone.
If you read the pretrial transcript of the second trial you will read the truth about the second autopsy, how she was actually found the agreement about the date she was left there. And that the bones slid off the 4x8 sheet of plywood when trying to carryher out.
Tell me, how is it that the one prosecutor at both trials and in charge of mickolovski's doctored books claims she knew nothing, and such and towed the party line at the inquiry.... BECAME A JUDGE... Makin did a piece about it in the globe.
As long as you keep mired in the miniscule minutia, You miss the true big picture.
Believe what you wish.
Wow, here is another printed opinion...
If anyone can figure it out pls let me know.
http://forensicastrology.blogspot.ca/2011/05/christine-jessop.html
If anyone can figure it out pls let me know.
http://forensicastrology.blogspot.ca/2011/05/christine-jessop.html
Here is the new book, claiming in the title that it is GPM's words...
http://gerrycan.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/justice-denied-cover.jpg
Anyone read this? GPM doesn't give interviews, this person approached me in another group. Wanting my help for a book about Christine. I got bad vibes and said no. And this is what is put out. Interesting eh.
http://gerrycan.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/justice-denied-cover.jpg
Anyone read this? GPM doesn't give interviews, this person approached me in another group. Wanting my help for a book about Christine. I got bad vibes and said no. And this is what is put out. Interesting eh.
And for Woodland, There were 4 versions, Orig. hardcover, blue cover when acquitted, paperback with pics in time for the odd man out special, then the final update at the end of the inquiry. Pls get your facts straight as I have each one.
More than just the 2 you state.
Look it up.
More than just the 2 you state.
Look it up.
Wow! Lots to chew on here Kenny and I hope you will give us some time to digest it all a bit. I confess I only read one Makin book myself and it was quite some time back. I did not want to read any more of that afterwards but I did read the next versions reviews and I did take in the Kaufman report.
The big picture is what I was left questioning right from the start. This is not just all the usual stuff that all discontented victims families say, it is the real stuff with real evidence to back it.
That is a tough spot to speak from. Makin and Kaufman both alluded to some sort of corruption that has never really been discussed. Perhaps what ever that was had a bearing on Makin's writing and perhaps whatever that was had a bearing on the constraints imposed on Kaufman as well?
The problem with any of that is applying it to an individual suspect. Why would it apply say the chicken man or any other? Without answers it becomes unsubstantiated unsupported baseless accusations minus plausibility. The viability of any coverup always has to have a motive and a reason.
I am aware there may be no easy answer but curious if there were more to be said on that subject? Why Christine?
Please bear with us a bit Kenny we are trying to understand. People have done their best to make sense of this with very little in the way of concrete fact to work with and it may take a bit to undo what was assumed to be true.
To us here, lets give it a chance to learn something new. Kenny has things to offer we won't get anywhere else..
The big picture is what I was left questioning right from the start. This is not just all the usual stuff that all discontented victims families say, it is the real stuff with real evidence to back it.
That is a tough spot to speak from. Makin and Kaufman both alluded to some sort of corruption that has never really been discussed. Perhaps what ever that was had a bearing on Makin's writing and perhaps whatever that was had a bearing on the constraints imposed on Kaufman as well?
The problem with any of that is applying it to an individual suspect. Why would it apply say the chicken man or any other? Without answers it becomes unsubstantiated unsupported baseless accusations minus plausibility. The viability of any coverup always has to have a motive and a reason.
I am aware there may be no easy answer but curious if there were more to be said on that subject? Why Christine?
Please bear with us a bit Kenny we are trying to understand. People have done their best to make sense of this with very little in the way of concrete fact to work with and it may take a bit to undo what was assumed to be true.
To us here, lets give it a chance to learn something new. Kenny has things to offer we won't get anywhere else..
Why gpm over the chicken man... LOL...
Fitzpatryk and Sheppard were old school cops. My mother answered a question they asked in an interview in Feb. They asked if anyone she knew was a little weird. She answered GPM.. AND a couple other people. The left the house, talked to gpm and got a gut feeling. Because gpm had a different way of putting things due to his francophone upbringing, they misconstrued his sayings as guilt. They then built the case around him. Getting the forensic det. to redo his books, getting stephani Nysnick to state the evidence was 100% him. And more for later.
The inquiry was instructed not to make findings of misconduct fought hard by GPM and my lawyers...
The report basically stated that no one intentially set out to convict an innocent man...
But did not take the next step and find that the law was broken to convict GPM, the one they thought was guilty.
Its a fine hair.
Fitzpatryk and Sheppard were old school cops. My mother answered a question they asked in an interview in Feb. They asked if anyone she knew was a little weird. She answered GPM.. AND a couple other people. The left the house, talked to gpm and got a gut feeling. Because gpm had a different way of putting things due to his francophone upbringing, they misconstrued his sayings as guilt. They then built the case around him. Getting the forensic det. to redo his books, getting stephani Nysnick to state the evidence was 100% him. And more for later.
The inquiry was instructed not to make findings of misconduct fought hard by GPM and my lawyers...
The report basically stated that no one intentially set out to convict an innocent man...
But did not take the next step and find that the law was broken to convict GPM, the one they thought was guilty.
Its a fine hair.
Almost a precedent setting example in that regard.
kj-
They in effect legalized breaking the law not only to convict an innocent man, but to obstruct the proper course of justice to the point the guilty walked.
And - kj-
Laws were being revised back then at that time requiring an act of parliament to authorize the Police to break the laws the rest of us are held to. The ability to do as you see here was something the Police had sought the legal right to perform.. And so they did... A fine hair indeed..
There is no doubt that laws were broken but it is also known that GPM had a pretty well airtight alibi replete with time receipt. So not only was the law broken to convict him, they also had to know he was innocent while doing it imo. It is tough to reconcile it all but also makes one wonder about the true perpetrator. Was the chicken man wealthy or some high level masonic figure or politically connected in some way? He wasn't the local mafia head or anything like that? Nothing unusual?
kj-
They in effect legalized breaking the law not only to convict an innocent man, but to obstruct the proper course of justice to the point the guilty walked.
And - kj-
Laws were being revised back then at that time requiring an act of parliament to authorize the Police to break the laws the rest of us are held to. The ability to do as you see here was something the Police had sought the legal right to perform.. And so they did... A fine hair indeed..
There is no doubt that laws were broken but it is also known that GPM had a pretty well airtight alibi replete with time receipt. So not only was the law broken to convict him, they also had to know he was innocent while doing it imo. It is tough to reconcile it all but also makes one wonder about the true perpetrator. Was the chicken man wealthy or some high level masonic figure or politically connected in some way? He wasn't the local mafia head or anything like that? Nothing unusual?
Glad to see the consensus is to agree to disagree.
KJessop - there is something in the new information I don't understand. The defense used Dr John Ferris, a pathologist, who claimed that in his opinion Christine was at the Sunderland site for as little as 2 weeks. Regardless of what he said, how then did the defense prove she was there since 3 October? Did the defense put on another expert to say something else?
Also, wondering what you thought of the investigation by Neal Tweedy and his task force from 1995 to 1998. Have not seen you comment on that before, only the other investigations. Was it adequate? Could they have done more? Why did they not test JP during that time?
Who were the investigating officers that thought JP's stepson was his bio son? Toronto Police? Did the stepson have a different last name? It would be a coincidence if he had the same last name.
How did JP know you and your mother were going to visit your father that day?
Sorry, I know some of these are repeat questions, but the answers will assist me with how to look at everything.
KJessop - there is something in the new information I don't understand. The defense used Dr John Ferris, a pathologist, who claimed that in his opinion Christine was at the Sunderland site for as little as 2 weeks. Regardless of what he said, how then did the defense prove she was there since 3 October? Did the defense put on another expert to say something else?
Also, wondering what you thought of the investigation by Neal Tweedy and his task force from 1995 to 1998. Have not seen you comment on that before, only the other investigations. Was it adequate? Could they have done more? Why did they not test JP during that time?
Who were the investigating officers that thought JP's stepson was his bio son? Toronto Police? Did the stepson have a different last name? It would be a coincidence if he had the same last name.
How did JP know you and your mother were going to visit your father that day?
Sorry, I know some of these are repeat questions, but the answers will assist me with how to look at everything.
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 214
This book was first mentioned in post#2 of this thread. I read it and posted a review in post #1061. If Redrum makes you angry, KJessop, this one will make you froth at the mouth. It's simplistic and poorly researched - to say the least. A book to be avoided.
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 214
This is a re-post of post #1132
And, questions from post #1137 (now posted here for the third time). Still hoping to get a response from KJessop
Using the information from KJessop, Ill attempt to sketch out a scenario of Christines movements and what may have actually occurred on October 3, 1984.
And, KJessop feel free to correct me wherever you feel I have made errors or have gone too far with my imagination.
Christine got off her school bus at approximately 3:45/3:50 pm.
She went into the house, dropped off the mail she had gathered from the end of the driveway as well as her school bag. Shortly thereafter, Christine got onto her bicycle and rode to the corner store to get some gum.
Christine did not go to the park or ever intend to meet Leslie Chipman at the park because the two of them were not on friendly terms. Leslie Chipmans claims that she and Christine had agreed to meet at the park with their Cabbage Patch dolls that day were, at best, a fabrication - or a creative embellishment on her part. Since Christines doll was eventually found in her room at home this indicates that she never intended to meet Leslie in the park with her doll.
After purchasing her gum at the store, Christine rode her bicycle back to the Jessop house, at which point she encountered JP in a blue car waiting at the end of the driveway. Christine knew JP or knew of his acquaintance with her father (Bob Jessop) so she felt at ease with him or there was a certain amount of trust with him.
JP spoke to Christine and likely told her that he intended to go visit her father at the detention center right then - and would she like to come with him? Christine leapt at the chance, hurried up the driveway to the house, and in her hurry - she did not secure her bicycle properly in the back shed.
JP waited in the blue car for her at the end of the driveway. (Or, perhaps he drove his car up to the house?)
Christine fetched her recorder from within the house (to show her father?) and then got into the blue car with JP and they drove off together. Christines bicycle fell over on its own after they left, or it fell over as Christine hurried to the car in the hopes of soon seeing her dad. In her excitement, she did not think to leave a note for her mother.
When Christine's mother and brother arrived home, they found her bike in a fallen state and the house empty.
KJessop... the answers to the following questions could help us flesh out the abduction scenario youre describing. If you wouldn't mind...?
1. Does the scenario I sketched out above seem to be close to the one you have in your mind? Where do you disagree or where does your thinking diverge?
2. Do you think that there is any possibility that JP took Christine to his house before leaving town with her? (Im thinking no as JPs daughters would probably have been home from school by then if they had observed his car at the end of the Jessop driveway as they were heading north (?) on a bus - but I'm wondering about your thoughts.)
3. I have not seen the Fifth Estate episode Odd Man Out so I dont know the details about the man who saw the incident in the blue car at Ravenshoe Road. What was the approximate time of that?
4. Do you have any inside information concerning other related-but-unreported crimes JP committed prior to Christine - or after that you could share here? (This would help us flesh out a suspect profile for him. You dont have to name names of victims.)
Thanks in advance.
And, questions from post #1137 (now posted here for the third time). Still hoping to get a response from KJessop
Using the information from KJessop, Ill attempt to sketch out a scenario of Christines movements and what may have actually occurred on October 3, 1984.
And, KJessop feel free to correct me wherever you feel I have made errors or have gone too far with my imagination.
Christine got off her school bus at approximately 3:45/3:50 pm.
She went into the house, dropped off the mail she had gathered from the end of the driveway as well as her school bag. Shortly thereafter, Christine got onto her bicycle and rode to the corner store to get some gum.
Christine did not go to the park or ever intend to meet Leslie Chipman at the park because the two of them were not on friendly terms. Leslie Chipmans claims that she and Christine had agreed to meet at the park with their Cabbage Patch dolls that day were, at best, a fabrication - or a creative embellishment on her part. Since Christines doll was eventually found in her room at home this indicates that she never intended to meet Leslie in the park with her doll.
After purchasing her gum at the store, Christine rode her bicycle back to the Jessop house, at which point she encountered JP in a blue car waiting at the end of the driveway. Christine knew JP or knew of his acquaintance with her father (Bob Jessop) so she felt at ease with him or there was a certain amount of trust with him.
JP spoke to Christine and likely told her that he intended to go visit her father at the detention center right then - and would she like to come with him? Christine leapt at the chance, hurried up the driveway to the house, and in her hurry - she did not secure her bicycle properly in the back shed.
JP waited in the blue car for her at the end of the driveway. (Or, perhaps he drove his car up to the house?)
Christine fetched her recorder from within the house (to show her father?) and then got into the blue car with JP and they drove off together. Christines bicycle fell over on its own after they left, or it fell over as Christine hurried to the car in the hopes of soon seeing her dad. In her excitement, she did not think to leave a note for her mother.
When Christine's mother and brother arrived home, they found her bike in a fallen state and the house empty.
KJessop... the answers to the following questions could help us flesh out the abduction scenario youre describing. If you wouldn't mind...?
1. Does the scenario I sketched out above seem to be close to the one you have in your mind? Where do you disagree or where does your thinking diverge?
2. Do you think that there is any possibility that JP took Christine to his house before leaving town with her? (Im thinking no as JPs daughters would probably have been home from school by then if they had observed his car at the end of the Jessop driveway as they were heading north (?) on a bus - but I'm wondering about your thoughts.)
3. I have not seen the Fifth Estate episode Odd Man Out so I dont know the details about the man who saw the incident in the blue car at Ravenshoe Road. What was the approximate time of that?
4. Do you have any inside information concerning other related-but-unreported crimes JP committed prior to Christine - or after that you could share here? (This would help us flesh out a suspect profile for him. You dont have to name names of victims.)
Thanks in advance.
Glad to see the consensus is to agree to disagree.
KJessop - there is something in the new information I don't understand. The defense used Dr John Ferris, a pathologist, who claimed that in his opinion Christine was at the Sunderland site for as little as 2 weeks. Regardless of what he said, how then did the defense prove she was there since 3 October? Did the defense put on another expert to say something else?
Ferris never attended the autopies, never witnessed the state of her body.. His opinion means nothing.
The second trial the defence claimed she was killed at the site on oct 3rd.. Due to the lady living near the site claiming she heard the screams. They claimed the screams were heard after the time gpm got home. There was never a dispute of the day other than by glory mongers trying to sound self important...
Also, wondering what you thought of the investigation by Neal Tweedy and his task force from 1995 to 1998. Have not seen you comment on that before, only the other investigations. Was it adequate? Could they have done more? Why did they not test JP during that time?
As i have said before, The letter was sent to my lawyer during the inquiry.
The investigation was a quick neat coverup. The answered phones... But any substantial leads were not investigated. IE JP, IE My abusers abuser whos father just happened to be High up in Metro when I brought the info forward during the inquiry.
Who were the investigating officers that thought JP's stepson was his bio son? Toronto Police? Did the stepson have a different last name? It would be a coincidence if he had the same last name.
No none of his stepkids had his last name. They were the investigators in 2004.
Someone asked earlier if the could get familiar dna from one of the daughters, no on the one child was his actual biological child. The daughters were all step daughters.
How did JP know you and your mother were going to visit your father that day?
Good question.
Also, wondering what you thought of the investigation by Neal Tweedy and his task force from 1995 to 1998. Have not seen you comment on that before, only the other investigations. Was it adequate? Could they have done more? Why did they not test JP during that time?
Who were the investigating officers that thought JP's stepson was his bio son? Toronto Police? Did the stepson have a different last name? It would be a coincidence if he had the same last name.
How did JP know you and your mother were going to visit your father that day?
Sorry, I know some of these are repeat questions, but the answers will assist me with how to look at everything.
KJessop - there is something in the new information I don't understand. The defense used Dr John Ferris, a pathologist, who claimed that in his opinion Christine was at the Sunderland site for as little as 2 weeks. Regardless of what he said, how then did the defense prove she was there since 3 October? Did the defense put on another expert to say something else?
Ferris never attended the autopies, never witnessed the state of her body.. His opinion means nothing.
The second trial the defence claimed she was killed at the site on oct 3rd.. Due to the lady living near the site claiming she heard the screams. They claimed the screams were heard after the time gpm got home. There was never a dispute of the day other than by glory mongers trying to sound self important...
Also, wondering what you thought of the investigation by Neal Tweedy and his task force from 1995 to 1998. Have not seen you comment on that before, only the other investigations. Was it adequate? Could they have done more? Why did they not test JP during that time?
As i have said before, The letter was sent to my lawyer during the inquiry.
The investigation was a quick neat coverup. The answered phones... But any substantial leads were not investigated. IE JP, IE My abusers abuser whos father just happened to be High up in Metro when I brought the info forward during the inquiry.
Who were the investigating officers that thought JP's stepson was his bio son? Toronto Police? Did the stepson have a different last name? It would be a coincidence if he had the same last name.
No none of his stepkids had his last name. They were the investigators in 2004.
Someone asked earlier if the could get familiar dna from one of the daughters, no on the one child was his actual biological child. The daughters were all step daughters.
How did JP know you and your mother were going to visit your father that day?
Good question.
Also, wondering what you thought of the investigation by Neal Tweedy and his task force from 1995 to 1998. Have not seen you comment on that before, only the other investigations. Was it adequate? Could they have done more? Why did they not test JP during that time?
Who were the investigating officers that thought JP's stepson was his bio son? Toronto Police? Did the stepson have a different last name? It would be a coincidence if he had the same last name.
How did JP know you and your mother were going to visit your father that day?
Sorry, I know some of these are repeat questions, but the answers will assist me with how to look at everything.
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 214
KJessop... There has been a lot of time and energy spent discussing books <modsnip>.. I feel like I'm sticking my head in a guillotine, but I would very much like to discuss the suspect (JP) you brought to this thread...
I think we have a responsibility to go deeper with that topic, as you have implicated him in the murder of your sister. Could we maybe return to that...?
I have posted some questions for you a few times... If you were to address them it could take this discussion and maybe the whole case in a more meaningful and fruitful direction.
What do you think?
I think we have a responsibility to go deeper with that topic, as you have implicated him in the murder of your sister. Could we maybe return to that...?
I have posted some questions for you a few times... If you were to address them it could take this discussion and maybe the whole case in a more meaningful and fruitful direction.
What do you think?
This thread has been in moderator review for quite awhile. When rules are broken, it can take a long time to get a thread back on track. Please remember these two important rules as you post in thread #2:
1) Link to facts unless you are a verified insider
and
2) Do not discuss other members personally. You can debate their information/opinions on a case, but you cannot be snarky towards them. If another member is getting under your skin, alert the post(s) and/or use the ignore feature.
Here's a link to the new thread, already in progress: Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville ON, 3 October 1984 #2 UNSOLVED - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
1) Link to facts unless you are a verified insider
and
2) Do not discuss other members personally. You can debate their information/opinions on a case, but you cannot be snarky towards them. If another member is getting under your skin, alert the post(s) and/or use the ignore feature.
Here's a link to the new thread, already in progress: Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville ON, 3 October 1984 #2 UNSOLVED - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
- Status