GUILTY Canada - Diane Werendowicz, 23, raped & murdered, Hamilton, Ont, June 1981

[deugirtni]

I read the defense closing comments. I agree with the defense.

I'm glad he said the crown threw out red herrings. I read part of the crown's closing and yes, they did it again, saying she was "humiliated" for example. They don't know that. They also said "She can't talk." Well, previous case legal documents her friends and own mother tried to talk for her and it wasn't allowed. That she can't talk is no proof RB is guilty. IMO

Interesting to now know what the defence was trying to show when they made the jury listen to 2 hours of recordings from the 911 line.

It really really bugs me when they talk about the panties, knowing from previous court records what was found in them, and yet at this trial (and others I'm sure), they say they had no semen in them... well yes they did, just not RB's. It seems to me that normally when evidence gets suppressed from the jury, it is because it is unfairly damaging to the accused. I have seriously never heard of suppressing evidence which could work in the accused's favor. It seems there are so many things in this trial that would be in RB's favor, but which are not allowed to be mentioned. It just doesn't seem right to me.

Remember earlier it was mentioned about there being no DNA from RB in the victim's mouth, and the Crown alluded that therefore the two never kissed? Now we find out they didn't even test for DNA, they only tested for the presence of semen, which they did not find. Well that proves a lot!

Also I noticed in the Defence's closing that it was a private investigator who asked BM's ex gf about the voice on the 911 recording. That leads me to wonder how well this case was investigated.. was it investigated with the purpose in mind of finding only evidence in regard to RB? It sounds like it. Was the recording ever played for close people in DW's ex-bf's life to see if it sounded like him? In any event, to me, the recording doesn't prove anything at all. It wasn't a taunt, as far as I'm concerned. It sounds like it was more someone trying to inform police of what he knew, not realizing that the police already knew everything he had to tell. The actual murderer would have known what the police would have already known. Someone who was told about it afterwards, maybe not so much.

The pressure is *really* going to be on this jury to come up with a verdict, and not be another hung jury. I hope they get it right.

 

[Claroon]

He says it is crown's job to prove RB killed her. I see no corroborating evidence that he did. No eye witness. No cleaned up hidden away clothes found. No DW souvenirs. He didn't even take a day off work. No drunken admissions. As a matter of fact, just getting off work he didn't have time to be drunk.

It's all speculation. I think I'll be mad if they say he's guilty after all the sleuthing we've done.

 

[Claroon]

Interesting to now know what the defence was trying to show when they made the jury listen to 2 hours of recordings from the 911 line.

It really really bugs me when they talk about the panties, knowing from previous court records what was found in them, and yet at this trial (and others I'm sure), they say they had no semen in them... well yes they did, just not RB's. It seems to me that normally when evidence gets suppressed from the jury, it is because it is unfairly damaging to the accused. I have seriously never heard of suppressing evidence which could work in the accused's favor. It seems there are so many things in this trial that would be in RB's favor, but which are not allowed to be mentioned. It just doesn't seem right to me.

Remember earlier it was mentioned about there being no DNA from RB in the victim's mouth, and the Crown alluded that therefore the two never kissed? Now we find out they didn't even test for DNA, they only tested for the presence of semen, which they did not find. Well that proves a lot!

Also I noticed in the Defence's closing that it was a private investigator who asked BM's ex gf about the voice on the 911 recording. That leads me to wonder how well this case was investigated.. was it investigated with the purpose in mind of finding only evidence in regard to RB? It sounds like it. Was the recording ever played for close people in DW's ex-bf's life to see if it sounded like him? In any event, to me, the recording doesn't prove anything at all. It wasn't a taunt, as far as I'm concerned. It sounds like it was more someone trying to inform police of what he knew, not realizing that the police already knew everything he had to tell. The actual murderer would have known what the police would have already known. Someone who was told about it afterwards, maybe not so much.

The pressure is *really* going to be on this jury to come up with a verdict, and not be another hung jury. I hope they get it right.

Did you catch the postulation that maybe those undies had been in the purse from another time? I'd never thought of that. Interesting though and would explain CV's semen in them. But I still can't picture how you get semen in undies and then decide to take them off and put them in your purse.

Here's a wild speculation. What if the undies weren't hers? What if she found them in her apartment, car, or CV's apartment and she phoned CV to confront him and had them with her to confront him later about them? CV admitted to seeing someone else maybe because he thought he had better fess up to that.

Maybe RB kept her undies as some guys back then did.

 

[dotr]

Did you catch the postulation that maybe those undies had been in the purse from another time? I'd never thought of that. Interesting though and would explain CV's semen in them. But I still can't picture how you get semen in undies and then decide to take them off and put them in your purse.

Here's a wild speculation. What if the undies weren't hers? What if she found them in her apartment, car, or CV's apartment and she phoned CV to confront him and had them with her to confront him later about them? CV admitted to seeing someone else maybe because he thought he had better fess up to that.

Maybe RB kept her undies as some guys back then did.

Just to add to the " wild speculation ", maybe if the pregnancy rumour was true, the underwear was kept to prove paternity?
imo.

 

[dotr]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...-with-deciding-badgerow-s-guilt-or-innocence/

KITCHENER — Most times, when a judge charges the jury before it begins deliberating at a murder trial, the part about needing to reach a unanimous verdict tends to get swept away in the boilerplate lecture. But those instructions bore special significance Thursday as the jury at accused killer Robert Badgerow's precedent-setting fourth trial prepares to be sequestered Monday.

Flynn spent the entire day on his charge but, as is common, left about one hour more to be read aloud Monday. Once he is done his charge, the jurors will be sequestered — they will bring their suitcases to the courthouse Monday — and this schedule spares them from deliberating over this weekend.

Before they start working on a verdict, a random draw will take place to remove one person from the jury, bringing the total to 12.
The jurors will stay in a Kitchener hotel at night and deliberate in a private room at the courthouse during the day, every day, until a verdict is rendered. Their phones and all other devices will be taken from them. The TVs in their hotel rooms will be disabled and they will have no access to any media or friends or family. They will be chaperoned by court staff at all times and their hotel rooms will be guarded at night.
The jurors will not be able to spend time together unless all 12 are present.
The jury told the court it has chosen a foreperson and an alternate foreperson to oversee deliberations and deliver the verdict.

 

[dotr]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitch...erow-murder-trial-diane-werendowicz-1.3865959

Use 'common sense' when weighing evidence in Robert Badgerow murder trial, judge tells jury


'Each of you has to decide the case for yourself,' Justice Patrick Flynn tells jury

Questions jury must ask

Flynn said there are five questions the jury must answer yes to, in order to find Badgerow guilty:

1. Did Badgerow cause the death of Werendowicz?
2. Did he cause her death unlawfully?
3. Was he in the "state of mind" for murder?
4. Did he rape Werendowicz?
5. Were the rape and murder of Werendowicz part of the same sequence of events?

If the jury answers yes to all these, he must be found guilty of first-degree murder.
If the jury does not think he had the state of mind for murder, but did kill her, then he would be guilty of manslaughter.
If he was in the state of mind to commit murder, but did not rape her, he is guilty of second-degree murder.
If he raped her, but her death was not in the same sequence of events as the rape, then he is guilty of second-degree murder.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitch...werendowicz-crown-closing-arguments-1.3864376

It's no coincidence evidence points to Robert Badgerow as the man who killed Diane Werendowicz in 1981, Crown Michael Fox said in closing arguments of the first-degree murder trial Wednesday.

"It means we have the right man," he said.
Fox said the defence has argued too many things were a coincidence.
"The defence throws up multiple theories for consideration, one after the other. It is like casting handfuls of straw on the surface of the water," Fox said. "It looks solid, it covers the surface, it obscures the view of the depths, but when grasped, it does not float."

 

[deugirtni]

Did you catch the postulation that maybe those undies had been in the purse from another time? I'd never thought of that. Interesting though and would explain CV's semen in them. But I still can't picture how you get semen in undies and then decide to take them off and put them in your purse.

Here's a wild speculation. What if the undies weren't hers? What if she found them in her apartment, car, or CV's apartment and she phoned CV to confront him and had them with her to confront him later about them? CV admitted to seeing someone else maybe because he thought he had better fess up to that.

Maybe RB kept her undies as some guys back then did.

Yes, i had never thought of that either. Which actually just goes to show that the possibilities may be limited only by our (closed) minds. personally i think there is another reason why her panties had CV's semen in them, but why was that not investigated and elaborated upon fully? Why was it disallowed evidence?

I would love to know more information about the investigation around the time of the murder. it's difficult to imagine what it would have been like at the time, when there were no cellphones, etc. How did CV and DW communicate and make plans? surely at the time, since CV was likely the closest one TO the victim, he would have been investigated to the fullest? Wasn't it said somewhere that the two had spoken on the phone several times throughout the day? But yet DW had worked a 12 hour shift. What were the calls about? Did CV offer up these phonecalls, or were they discovered during the investigation? I'm presuming that the phone records of each would have been scrutinized?

Because there seems to be so much evidence disallowed, which would have brought the heat away from RB, it makes me wonder what else they know, that they're not telling us, such as... was she pregnant at the time of her death? Had she had a recent abortion? What type of 'on-again/off-again' type of games had historically been played between the two? ie if one 'screwed around', would the other then screw around, just to get even? Did they try to make one another jealous? We know really very little about CV and DW's relationship, and perhaps even less about DW as a person. Were CV's friends, coworkers, employers and family members questioned in regard to his whereabouts on the evening of the 19th/early morning of the 20th?

Were DW's panties checked for her OWN DNA? (To prove they were even her panties?)

 

[Claroon]

Yes, i had never thought of that either. Which actually just goes to show that the possibilities may be limited only by our (closed) minds. personally i think there is another reason why her panties had CV's semen in them, but why was that not investigated and elaborated upon fully? Why was it disallowed evidence?

I would love to know more information about the investigation around the time of the murder. it's difficult to imagine what it would have been like at the time, when there were no cellphones, etc. How did CV and DW communicate and make plans? surely at the time, since CV was likely the closest one TO the victim, he would have been investigated to the fullest? Wasn't it said somewhere that the two had spoken on the phone several times throughout the day? But yet DW had worked a 12 hour shift. What were the calls about? Did CV offer up these phonecalls, or were they discovered during the investigation? I'm presuming that the phone records of each would have been scrutinized?

Because there seems to be so much evidence disallowed, which would have brought the heat away from RB, it makes me wonder what else they know, that they're not telling us, such as... was she pregnant at the time of her death? Had she had a recent abortion? What type of 'on-again/off-again' type of games had historically been played between the two? ie if one 'screwed around', would the other then screw around, just to get even? Did they try to make one another jealous? We know really very little about CV and DW's relationship, and perhaps even less about DW as a person. Were CV's friends, coworkers, employers and family members questioned in regard to his whereabouts on the evening of the 19th/early morning of the 20th?

Were DW's panties checked for her OWN DNA? (To prove they were even her panties?)

Lots of valid points. I also thought I read her friend said she disconnected her phone so that other ex couldn't call her. And I read she talked to CV earlier that day by phone. So she would have called from work I suppose.

As to our closed minds. Yes, we do tend to have tunnel vision until someone brings up another possibility. I wonder how it is defence came up with that idea?

What if it was CV following her and she pulled out the panties to show him what she found and that's when the comb flew out?
I only caught it yesterday that the comb was several ft west of Lake Rd. I'm not following that.

 

[deugirtni]

Lots of valid points. I also thought I read her friend said she disconnected her phone so that other ex couldn't call her. And I read she talked to CV earlier that day by phone. So she would have called from work I suppose.

As to our closed minds. Yes, we do tend to have tunnel vision until someone brings up another possibility. I wonder how it is defence came up with that idea?

What if it was CV following her and she pulled out the panties to show him what she found and that's when the comb flew out?
I only caught it yesterday that the comb was several ft west of Lake Rd. I'm not following that.

Yes, I went and had a look at the map again after hearing the Crown say that (about the location of the yellow comb). In earlier evidence was it shown that that yellow comb contained DNA from DW? (I'm assuming they would have run tests on any hair found in the comb to confirm that it was hers?) So that is where the Crown is saying she was initially attacked (which of course is pure speculation on their part).

Also, it was said at some point that it was weird/meaningful that the panties were found NOT inside her purse, and how did they get out of the purse, and that they were NOT found inside her pocket. Well, how is that of interest when there were obviously several items that also were NOT in her purse, including her wallet, which never seems to be mentioned having been also found near the shoes? Did the wallet contain cash? I can't remember if they mentioned?

It the Crown wants to create the story that she was attacked, raped, dragged, then how do they explain her jeans being back on? And that there were no scratches from underbrush, needles, burrs, stones, crinkly leaves, etc., found on her body? Did I read at one point the Crown said something about there wouldn't be any scratches from 'lush' grass?? But it wasn't lush grass there under the trees, by the 'crick'. Their story isn't 'cutting mustard', as they say.

That is an interesting theory that you have about the panties potentially being found by DW in CV's possession somehow, from another lover of his. If it was said that DW also visited his residence, or that she had a key to his residence and showed up there without notice periodically, or even if CV had a car, that could be a potential theory. But considering that it sounds like the two only ever got together when CV visited her on her turf, and that he drove a motorcycle, it would seem unlikely.

But still wondering if DW's DNA was found in the panties, along with CV's. That would be an amazing clue if DW's DNA was NOT found in them! Who knows, because not enough personal info is known about DW, if she even wore panties. Some women, even in 1981, did not. Unfortunately the jury will never know about what was found in those panties.

It seems so unfair that the defence can't use any personal information about the victim, such as whether she may have entertained one-night-stands in the past, whether she became perhaps promiscuous when intoxicated/stoned, etc. I understand that we can't be 'blaming the victim', but that information seems rather pertinent to the defence in making its case at least in this trial. Meanwhile the Crown gets to state that it would be virtually impossible for DW to have chosen to have random sex with a stranger within a short time of meeting him.

The fact that DW and CV seemed to have no way of communicating at that very time period, is very interesting to me, because plans can change spontaneously, surprises can be planned by one party without the knowledge of the other party, etc. It is entirely possible that CV could have decided to pay DW a visit before heading up north with his buddies, without anyone necessarily knowing about it, and without any clues leading up to it. We're not seeing any proof of when exactly he was released from his job that night, nor of when exactly he got together with his buddies to head up north. Not that it is his trial... but it seems rather pertinent to RB's defence to be able to rule that possibility in or out.

 

[Claroon]

I wish reporters would retweet unbiased tweets. I've seen retweets about this being 4th time get it right. But 4th time has nothing to do with this case for the jury. I.e. they aren't to consider that.

DNA is there, yes. Thanks to DNA testing being made possible in 1998. But does DNA prove a man has a mind for murder?

Who would have a mind for murder? For all we know it was Dennis Howe. Now he had a mind for murder! And a dollar bill to put into her wallet.

 

[Claroon]

Want to add this to the journal...Regarding maneuvering into the back seat of the car. That would have to ASSUME they started in the front seat. Our closed minds would make us think that.

But what if it was something like this:

Back in the day, young people would hang out in parking lots outside their cars--like at McDonald's or DQ. They'd jack up their stereo which was find because a bar would have loud music anyhow. He did refer to installing one. I can picture (imagine) him standing outside his car smoking when she saunters by. Targeting random strangers isn't unheard of. Once I was at a track running at night and a random guy sat on the bleachers and then yelled over to me, "Wanna get laid?" I skidaddled!

I can see him offering her a smoke and they'd stand leaning on the hood or trunk. It would be easy then to say wanna toke up? Then open the back door and crawl inside--to the back seat.

I suspect whether it be a Beaumont or Monte Carlo, that it was a 2 door. Does it matter if it was back or front seat? Some cars had a console and bucket seats, others bench.

 

[deugirtni]

Want to add this to the journal...Regarding maneuvering into the back seat of the car. That would have to ASSUME they started in the front seat. Our closed minds would make us think that.

But what if it was something like this:

Back in the day, young people would hang out in parking lots outside their cars--like at McDonald's or DQ. They'd jack up their stereo which was find because a bar would have loud music anyhow. He did refer to installing one. I can picture (imagine) him standing outside his car smoking when she saunters by. Targeting random strangers isn't unheard of. Once I was at a track running at night and a random guy sat on the bleachers and then yelled over to me, "Wanna get laid?" I skidaddled!

I can see him offering her a smoke and they'd stand leaning on the hood or trunk. It would be easy then to say wanna toke up? Then open the back door and crawl inside--to the back seat.

I suspect whether it be a Beaumont or Monte Carlo, that it was a 2 door. Does it matter if it was back or front seat? Some cars had a console and bucket seats, others bench.

Yes, so true. Crown was definitely having a closed mind about that (as was I). Easy to imagine it happening in the way you have proposed.

 

[deugirtni]

Remember when at the beginning of the trial, one of the jurors was excused? Tonight on the 6pm news, LH reported that one of the jurors at the beginning, had sent SC a communication offering to give her the scoop on the private goings-on in the jury room. SC went straight to the powers that be, and court was put on hold until police could determine from which juror it came from... at which time said juror was immediately excused (and faces no charges). Unbelievable. It was a male, and apparently he blamed it on his wife, saying it had been her idea, and then he had sent another communication to SC taking it all back, and saying he realized his error. Wow. Guess we have all kinds in this world.

 

[deugirtni]

AC wrote an article on the above:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/badgerow-1.3871556

 

[deugirtni]

I wonder how *this* marriage is faring...

I received no more emails. Around noon on the third day, the investigation got results. The emails traced to a billing address for a woman in Cambridge. She was the wife of Juror 12. Silverstein wanted Juror 12, an IT professional, questioned to learn if it was him or his wife who wrote the emails and what he may have said with other jurors.

Furthermore, Silverstein wanted him discharged. "He's prepared to break the law. There's an offer in the first email to share information with a reporter that he's not entitled to share … This poses a real risk to the integrity of the trial."

The Crown agreed it was a "foregone conclusion" Juror 12 must go.

The judge ordered staff to "carefully and quietly" bring Juror 12 into court. The other jurors were not to know anything about the emails.

When Flynn asked him about copies of the emails, Juror 12 acted surprised. "I don't know about those. I didn't really talk to my wife about much stuff. I'm absolutely shocked."

"It's a crime to reveal things from a jury room," Flynn said. "This has caused a lot of concern and discussion."

Juror 12 was discharged, ordered not to communicate with other jurors and escorted out.

Weeks later, I called Juror 12's home to ask about the emails. His wife was furious. "I have nothing to do with this," she shouted. "This has nothing to do with me. I didn't contact you. I'm a very intelligent woman." She hung up.

Juror 12 called me moments later. He agreed somebody in his house sent the email, but it wasn't him. He lives with his wife and young children. "It makes no sense to me. I don't know why it was sent. There was no benefit to that person to contact you. And I've worried every day about being arrested."

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...e-email-sparked-probe-delayed-badgerow-trial/

 

[deugirtni]

Interesting how the media can't wait to disclose to the public as soon as deliberations begin, about the other charges against RB, which were dropped, and which were not allowed to be mentioned during the trial... but yet, they don't bother mentioning about the other potential suspects, and what was actually found inside DW's panties. Kind of sickening, imho.

 

[Claroon]

Interesting how the media can't wait to disclose to the public as soon as deliberations begin, about the other charges against RB, which were dropped, and which were not allowed to be mentioned during the trial... but yet, they don't bother mentioning about the other potential suspects, and what was actually found inside DW's panties. Kind of sickening, imho.

Just in case someone Googles Robert Badgerow I thought I'd type his name in here so they can read some of these posts. This Thread was titled with DW's name not Robert Badgerow's. No one is going to Google DW for info. IMO

 

[Claroon]

Modern day cases we tend to side with LE and trust their work and the Crown's work, but this is a little different. It is all based on a shoddy LE investigation from 1981 and on. I think a few members of the public should keep their mouths closed unless they've done the background research we have.

In other words, I respect LE, I respect DNA testing, I respect the Crown, but even they can be wrong. In Robert Badgerow's case, I pray for the jury that God will tell them what they need to know and that His will be done. That's all I can ask because even I can be wrong.

 

[deugirtni]

Modern day cases we tend to side with LE and trust their work and the Crown's work, but this is a little different. It is all based on a shoddy LE investigation from 1981 and on. I think a few members of the public should keep their mouths closed unless they've done the background research we have.

In other words, I respect LE, I respect DNA testing, I respect the Crown, but even they can be wrong. In Robert Badgerow's case, I pray for the jury that God will tell them what they need to know and that His will be done. That's all I can ask because even I can be wrong.

It actually happens way more than we would hope, that LE gets a couple of things that click in one direction, and from then on, they're pursuing everything according to that angle. We hear it here all the time, that 'there ARE no coincidences'. Well, in fact, yes there are. Surely it must happen to everyone that coincidences even happen in their own lives at times.

It is also forgivable to an extent, knowing the perps and the crimes and the horrible things that LE have to see and hear and learn about on a daily basis, and it is no wonder that it can be difficult for some to believe there can still be coincidences in life, and that things are not always as they might seem to be.

They do have the power to direct an investigation in one way over another though, and it's kind of scary. Police.. lawyers.. prosecutors.. judges.. they are all just people in the end, and it certainly has been shown that no occupation or educational level precludes the possibility of making mistakes, pursuing internal agendas, not living up to the gold standard that people seem to hold them to, etc.

All I know is that humans are sure interesting.

 

[Claroon]

It actually happens way more than we would hope, that LE gets a couple of things that click in one direction, and from then on, they're pursuing everything according to that angle. We hear it here all the time, that 'there ARE no coincidences'. Well, in fact, yes there are. Surely it must happen to everyone that coincidences even happen in their own lives at times.

It is also forgivable to an extent, knowing the perps and the crimes and the horrible things that LE have to see and hear and learn about on a daily basis, and it is no wonder that it can be difficult for some to believe there can still be coincidences in life, and that things are not always as they might seem to be.

They do have the power to direct an investigation in one way over another though, and it's kind of scary. Police.. lawyers.. prosecutors.. judges.. they are all just people in the end, and it certainly has been shown that no occupation or educational level precludes the possibility of making mistakes, pursuing internal agendas, not living up to the gold standard that people seem to hold them to, etc.

All I know is that humans are sure interesting.

A TV show I was watching (didn't follow completely close but...) a guy had been imprisoned 10 yrs. He had met with a troubled student who then disappeared. He had put his coat around her as she was cold and apparently her blood was found on his coat. That and having been ID'd as being in the cafe with her were the only incriminating things. She was eventually found having been locked up in a basement, and they discovered she'd been a cutter and had been so upset that night, she'd been cutting and that is how her blood got on his coat. Apparently, it was someone else who kidnapped her. So he was convicted based on the blood alone which LE had erroneously made conclusions about. Just a story, but could happen.

Still, if CV's semen was in the panties found at the scene of the crime, that should not have been overlooked.