Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 *killer identified* #3

[Tadpole12]

Real Justice: Guilty of Being Weird

Wrt timeline and bike

P26
"The afternoon Christine went missing, Janet picked up her son, Kenny, from school. They went to visit Robert Jessop at the Toronto East Detention Center. After the visit, Janet dropped Kenny off for his dentist appointment in the nearby town of Newmarket and did some errands. She arrived back at the dentist, paid their bill, and at about 4 p.m. they drove home.

The house looked quiet when Janet and Ken arrived home. Janet pulled to a stop in front of the shed leading to the back door. Christine's bike was lying on its side in the shed. ... What really concerned her was that the kickstand on her daughter's bike was bent."

P29
"I looked at the kitchen wall clock because I had promised my husband I would call his lawyer and give him a message. I knew when I came in, I had time to have a cup of coffee before I had to call him. His office closes at five." (JJ)


P35
"An identification officer arrived around midnight to fingerprint the bicycle and take pictures."

 

[Tadpole12]

I agree. As the identity of Christine’s killer has finally been established through his DNA there’s no reason for LE to publicly dwell on the details of her murder as he’s dead, no murder charges will be laid so no reason to pursue an investigation as no trial will occur.

If LE are able to connect other murders to him hopefully that’ll provide closure to other cold case files and answers to other families who will finally know who was responsible. indeed, often times it’s preferable the accused is dead so loved ones don’t have to sit through a long trial and relive heartbreak by hearing all the evidence.

I thought it was said the police were investigating CH timeline and possibility of an accessory?

 

[MistyWaters]

I thought it was said the police were investigating CH timeline and possibility of an accessory?

I hadn’t noticed that reported anywhere, did I miss it? Determining a timeline of a deceased person from 36 years ago would be impossible I’d think.

DNA identifies Christine Jessop's killer 36 years later | Toronto Sun
“After obtaining a judicial order, Hoover’s DNA sample was compared to the semen recovered by investigators 36 years ago.

It was a match.

Having sat in the cold case files for 36 years, finding Christine’s killer consumed the lives and careers of many investigators.

Ramer, who had only been on the job for four years when Christine was murdered, said finally solving this case offers a real sense of closure.

“There is a great sense of relief, but not just in the policing profession,” he said.

“I think I’d be pretty safe to say that we’re all genuinely relieved that the person actually responsible for this has finally been identified.”...”

ETA - However investigators are seeking to determine the timeline of other locations where CH lived to determine if he was responsible for other crimes.
Police set up tip line to help trace steps of Christine Jessop’s killer
“Investigators are now trying to trace his steps, starting from 1984—the year Jessop was killed.”

 

[Sphinx]

Real Justice: Guilty of Being Weird

Wrt timeline and bike

P26
"The afternoon Christine went missing, Janet picked up her son, Kenny, from school. They went to visit Robert Jessop at the Toronto East Detention Center. After the visit, Janet dropped Kenny off for his dentist appointment in the nearby town of Newmarket and did some errands. She arrived back at the dentist, paid their bill, and at about 4 p.m. they drove home.

The house looked quiet when Janet and Ken arrived home. Janet pulled to a stop in front of the shed leading to the back door. Christine's bike was lying on its side in the shed. ... What really concerned her was that the kickstand on her daughter's bike was bent."

P29
"I looked at the kitchen wall clock because I had promised my husband I would call his lawyer and give him a message. I knew when I came in, I had time to have a cup of coffee before I had to call him. His office closes at five." (JJ)


P35
"An identification officer arrived around midnight to fingerprint the bicycle and take pictures."

Interesting that the bike was in a shed attached to the house, and back door entrance. I wonder if the condition of the bike indicates that a struggle took place in the shed, away from public view, and that is where he captured her ? Since there were no fingerprints on the bike that identified him, CH likely wore gloves. CH may have become very nervous because of the struggle, and forgot to place the bike in it's usual position against the wall. The bent kick stand is a new detail for me. That could indicate there was quite a fight, and the bike was thrown down. CJ could have ended up on top of her bike, with CH's weight on top of her and the bike. That could bend a kickstand. She might have even tried to get on her bike and get away from him, which of course would infuriate CH. He could have tied her hands and feet, gagged her and and just thrown her in the trunk of his car. From pictures online, it looks like a fairly long driveway. If he parked close to the house, with the back of the car towards the shed door, and the trunk lid up, maybe that is why no one saw her being abducted. I am puzzled though about CJ managing to keep her recorder with her, if there was a struggle, unless CH had already picked it up in the house, and put it in his pocket, maybe to make it look like she was outside somewhere playing with it.

The other thing possibly out of place in the house that day, was that Cj's pink jacket was hung up on a peg too high for her to reach. Maybe CH hung it up while he waited for her to return home from the store, again trying to make things look normal, and forgot about her height.

The Jessops apparently, like a lot of people in Queensville during those days, did not lock their doors, so it would have been easy for him to go into the house to wait for her. Is there any way he could have hidden his car behind their house, and left by another door out of the shed, then driven off through the cemetery ? . Just some thoughts and some questions. IMO

 

[casesensitive]

I hadn’t noticed that reported anywhere, did I miss it? Determining a timeline of a deceased person from 36 years ago would be impossible I’d think.

Upon the positive identification, police said they are still looking to trace the movements of Hoover from 1984 to 2015, when he died by suicide.

Hoover lived in Toronto, Durham Region and Port Hope.

Investigators said they have received over 60 tips from the public so far and have now set up a dedicated tip line and email.

“The officers with the Cold Case section of Homicide have been grateful for the information they have received so far,” said Inspector Hank Idsinga, Unit Commander of Homicide. “Every detail that comes in can help us determine the last moments of Christine’s life and establish any connection to other possible incidents.

Toronto police announce tip line for further investigation in murder of Christine Jessop

 

[MistyWaters]

Upon the positive identification, police said they are still looking to trace the movements of Hoover from 1984 to 2015, when he died by suicide.

Hoover lived in Toronto, Durham Region and Port Hope.

Investigators said they have received over 60 tips from the public so far and have now set up a dedicated tip line and email.

“The officers with the Cold Case section of Homicide have been grateful for the information they have received so far,” said Inspector Hank Idsinga, Unit Commander of Homicide. “Every detail that comes in can help us determine the last moments of Christine’s life and establish any connection to other possible incidents.

Toronto police announce tip line for further investigation in murder of Christine Jessop

Thanks, perhaps that’s what Tadpole12’s reply was referring to. But my earlier post regarded the timeline occurring the actual day of the murder of Christine. As CH was never identified as a suspect, 36 years later it would be impossible for LE to recreate his activities that same day and as his DNA was a match to the underwear, I don’t think anyone would argue he’s the killer.

The only outstanding question is why CH was never a possible suspect.

JMO

 

[casesensitive]

Thanks, perhaps that’s what Tadpole12’s reply was referring to. But my earlier post regarded the timeline occurring the actual day of the murder of Christine. As CH was never identified as a suspect, 36 years later it would be impossible for LE to recreate his activities that same day and as his DNA was a match to the underwear, I don’t think anyone would argue he’s the killer.

The only outstanding question is why CH was never a possible suspect.

JMO

LE, as stated in my above post, want to "establish any connection to other possible incidents" (eg unsolved cases).

 

[MistyWaters]

LE, as stated in my above post, want to "establish any connection to other possible incidents" (eg unsolved cases).

Agreed, so they should.

 

[Tadpole12]

I hadn’t noticed that reported anywhere, did I miss it? Determining a timeline of a deceased person from 36 years ago would be impossible I’d think.

DNA identifies Christine Jessop's killer 36 years later | Toronto Sun
“After obtaining a judicial order, Hoover’s DNA sample was compared to the semen recovered by investigators 36 years ago.

It was a match.

Having sat in the cold case files for 36 years, finding Christine’s killer consumed the lives and careers of many investigators.

Ramer, who had only been on the job for four years when Christine was murdered, said finally solving this case offers a real sense of closure.

“There is a great sense of relief, but not just in the policing profession,” he said.

“I think I’d be pretty safe to say that we’re all genuinely relieved that the person actually responsible for this has finally been identified.”...”

ETA - However investigators are seeking to determine the timeline of other locations where CH lived to determine if he was responsible for other crimes.
Police set up tip line to help trace steps of Christine Jessop’s killer
“Investigators are now trying to trace his steps, starting from 1984—the year Jessop was killed.”

Ty MW.
Yes, I am unsure of my recollection.

 

[Truth Prevails]

Thanks, perhaps that’s what Tadpole12’s reply was referring to. But my earlier post regarded the timeline occurring the actual day of the murder of Christine. As CH was never identified as a suspect, 36 years later it would be impossible for LE to recreate his activities that same day and as his DNA was a match to the underwear, I don’t think anyone would argue he’s the killer.

The only outstanding question is why CH was never a possible suspect.

JMO

I agree that this is a very important question; however, I think the public deserves more explanation as to how and why he targeted Christine--the only daughter of his then wife's friend and the only daughter of someone he worked with/for.

What is the possibility of error with this relatively new technology? Why did they happen to have a vial of the guy's blood handy?

If he was still alive and refused to confess, the prosecutors would need more evidence than his DNA on Christine's underwear to take him to trial. So where and what is it?

After all, they twice prosecuted the wrong guy. I want to be sure they looked into this carefully and didn't just pick someone who can't defend himself so they can finally say they solved the case.

I think back to the condition of Christine's remains, and if that was stagging and not something caused by frost it's very concerning. Usually, the only people who do something like that fall into two categories: serial killers or someone with a deep, deep anger at the victim.

Deep anger--a rage even--at a 9-year-old child who didn't have such a great life?

So, I absolutely believe we, the public, deserve a much better explanation than what we have been given so far.

I doubt we will get it, but we should.

 

[Keswick84]

I agree that this is a very important question; however, I think the public deserves more explanation as to how and why he targeted Christine--the only daughter of his then wife's friend and the only daughter of someone he worked with/for.

What is the possibility of error with this relatively new technology? Why did they happen to have a vial of the guy's blood handy?

If he was still alive and refused to confess, the prosecutors would need more evidence than his DNA on Christine's underwear to take him to trial. So where and what is it?

After all, they twice prosecuted the wrong guy. I want to be sure they looked into this carefully and didn't just pick someone who can't defend himself so they can finally say they solved the case.

I think back to the condition of Christine's remains, and if that was stagging and not something caused by frost it's very concerning. Usually, the only people who do something like that fall into two categories: serial killers or someone with a deep, deep anger at the victim.

Deep anger--a rage even--at a 9-year-old child who didn't have such a great life?

So, I absolutely believe we, the public, deserve a much better explanation than what we have been given so far.

I doubt we will get it, but we should.

Technology builds a family tree. His name came up. He killed himself so they would have taken a blood sample-which they had. It was a match. He did it.

Even without a DNA sample, as soon as his name came up they would have established a connection to the family and it would have been obvious that he did it. Already having the DNA on file just sped up the process of confirming it was him. Any judge would have granted permission to get a DNA sample once the police connected his name to the family.

 

[MsBetsy]

I agree that this is a very important question; however, I think the public deserves more explanation as to how and why he targeted Christine--the only daughter of his then wife's friend and the only daughter of someone he worked with/for.

What is the possibility of error with this relatively new technology? Why did they happen to have a vial of the guy's blood handy?

If he was still alive and refused to confess, the prosecutors would need more evidence than his DNA on Christine's underwear to take him to trial. So where and what is it?

After all, they twice prosecuted the wrong guy. I want to be sure they looked into this carefully and didn't just pick someone who can't defend himself so they can finally say they solved the case.

I think back to the condition of Christine's remains, and if that was stagging and not something caused by frost it's very concerning. Usually, the only people who do something like that fall into two categories: serial killers or someone with a deep, deep anger at the victim.

Deep anger--a rage even--at a 9-year-old child who didn't have such a great life?

So, I absolutely believe we, the public, deserve a much better explanation than what we have been given so far.

I doubt we will get it, but we should.

I think the DNA evidence would have been enough to convict him if he was alive and didn't confess. DNA does not lie and his didn't belong on the victim's underwear. There would have been no way for him to explain that away.

The prosecution would also have testimony by Christine's brother that his mom told Hoover's wife about the visit to the jail. Hoover's ex-wife or other witnesses would have been called to testify as to his whereabouts that day and what time he came home.

Investigators can still try to find out all those details.

 

[Deleted member 275109]

I received an alert that one of my posts was deleted due to copyright. I have no idea which post or why. Does anyone know what that means? I don’t want to make the same mistake again.

 

[deugirtni]

I received an alert that one of my posts was deleted due to copyright. I have no idea which post or why. Does anyone know what that means? I don’t want to make the same mistake again.

Did you perhaps quote an entire article? They only allow a certain percentage of any given article to be quoted. Or possibly if you quoted a subscriber-only article, which others don't have access to and which the venue wants people to pay for?

 

[photographer4]

Are we (and LE) satisfied that CH acted alone in this crime? I'd like to know how he he knew of / learned about the location where little CJ's remains were found. Did he know someone there? Had a delivery there in the past? Set up a service for someone there in the past? Towed the trailer there for someone? This wasn't an area you'd KNOW about in my opinion from having just driven around the area on a whim with an abducted 9 year old in your vehicle. The connection to the location is super concerning to me, is it to anyone else?

 

[Andreee]

The main thing, to me, is that the murder of CJ would have been ridiculously easy. To overpower a 9 year old child really speaks of a coward, and CH even had a story to tell her, and she knew him. So IMO I would suspect him in other cowardly crimes, where there is one small defenseless victim. So anybody female, alone, and under about 25 years old. All my opinion.

That's exactly what I was thinking, after reading very briefly about the three other cases mentioned in the previous posts. Those women were older and I keep thinking he might be too cowardly and small of stature to be able to easily subdue them, compared to a small young child. Also, the creep may've just had pedophile tendencies. IMO. Of course, if he had a gun...

 

[Forest_Wood]

WARMINGTON: Don't forget slain Christine Jessop is the story | Toronto Sun

According to this article, the rumour of a nervous breakdown did not come from a health care provider. It would take some time to determine what she was experiencing when she was delivered the news.

 

[Forest_Wood]

Are we (and LE) satisfied that CH acted alone in this crime? I'd like to know how he he knew of / learned about the location where little CJ's remains were found. Did he know someone there? Had a delivery there in the past? Set up a service for someone there in the past? Towed the trailer there for someone? This wasn't an area you'd KNOW about in my opinion from having just driven around the area on a whim with an abducted 9 year old in your vehicle. The connection to the location is super concerning to me, is it to anyone else?

I wonder if he just drove around in the country until he found an out-of-the-way trail. If we are to believe the screams that were heard later in the evening by those two people in the neighbouring homes, they didn’t hear the screams and cries for help until after they went to bed (10pm? 11pm? — I can’t recall exact time). What happened between 4 pm and 10 or 11 pm? I wonder if he made more than one stop to assault CJ before finally finding that place in the end.

 

[Deleted member 275109]

I wonder if he just drove around in the country until he found an out-of-the-way trail. If we are to believe the screams that were heard later in the evening by those two people in the neighbouring homes, they didn’t hear the screams and cries for help until after they went to bed (10pm? 11pm? — I can’t recall exact time). What happened between 4 pm and 10 or 11 pm? I wonder if he made more than one stop to assault CJ before finally finding that place in the end.

If CH was with Christine from 4pm to 10 or 11pm, and still had to drive home to Etobicoke, at what time did he finally get there? What was his excuse to the wife? I wonder if we will ever know. Will HH ever do an interview. Regardless, it’s been 2 weeks since the news broke about her husband’s involvement. I hope she’s had a chance to pick up the phone and call her friend Mrs. Jessop and help her fill in some of the gaps. That poor mother, the whole family, must be wondering why. They know who finally, but why. Why would he do that to their sweet little girl? If he absolutely had to do this, why to the daughter of a family friend? Was it simply easy access, the opportunity presented itself? Did he have a grudge against them? Maybe they will never know why but maybe HH can she’s some light onto the thinking of that monster.

 

[deugirtni]

I agree. As the identity of Christine’s killer has finally been established through his DNA there’s no reason for LE to publicly dwell on the details of her murder as he’s dead, no murder charges will be laid so no reason to pursue an investigation as no trial will occur. .....

I recalled police in the recent Nova Scotia murders saying they would still investigate the case just as if the killer was still alive.. I don't see why this case would be different. In both cases, they know for sure who the killer was and that both are dead and will never face trial. This has been a very important Canadian case all around with many out-reaching implications and considerations. To me, it would just be wrong to not bother pursuing an investigation into what exactly happened. Although the details of CJ's murder are gruesome, they are the facts. That poor girl actually endured everything that happened to her before (and after) her death, the least we can do is to not let it be forgotten and swept away just because we now know who her killer was. There seem to still be many unanswered questions in this well known case with much public interest. jmo.

“Though the gunman will never stand trial, we have a duty to complete this investigation by the same standards that we would have if he were standing trial,” Supt. Campbell said. “There are many more interviews to come, and we expect that witness list to grow.”
Nova Scotia RCMP identify 435 witnesses as investigation into mass shooting continues