Good to hear this!
I kind of disagree with what your local friend said. I think the RCMP did absolutely everything they could and never stopped working at it. If you talk to the Scott family they’ll tell you the same thing. Some people may have spoke to the RCMP with information and felt it wasn’t taken seriously or whatever, there are tons of reasons why they may have seemed uninterested. Because we don’t ever know fully what they know or what they’re up to. As well as how many ridiculous tips they have to follow up on. I’ve heard tons of stories of some of our locals wasting their time entirely. Imagine with all the info they had gathered and still having to sit down and listen to the local self proclaimed psychic insist on telling you about the dream she had that maddy is living in Austria back packing (I’m not even kidding, maybe not exactly that fairytale but ones just like it) those were the people running around saying the cops weren’t doing anything. Anyone involved will tell you they truly worked their asses off, and still are out there now on that property making sure they sift through every inch of it. We don’t know enough details right now to even know truly how the case had a break, or who specifically was responsible for the break. There’s literally no verified information right now as to how her remains were found. That’s ALL local gossip. So until the story comes out from the RCMP, all these theories are mostly really big reaches.
The 48 Hours - Highway of Tears segment about Maddy is the most blatant example of exactly what you're talking about that I've ever seen. This was before Searchlight even existed. This information has all been public since 2012. This was an aggressive move IMO.
You're describing the essence of basic investigating efforts. Of course, more exposure means more "psychics", and more useless leads but it's still way better than no leads at all and investigators should be adjusted to it. Many, many murders in BC, they weren't cops from the middle of nowhere where the worst crime happened in 1962, when somebody stole a cow (if they were it'd be fully understandable that they were shocked by these new, unknown circumstances).
Thank you. Some very solid advice here. No doubt the RCMP has been doing everything they can to solve this case, and continue to do so. Much of this effort and many details may never be known to us, though hopefully some will. I'll say it is interesting how tight-lipped they've been so far, and for so long. This would be highly unusual in the US. There are probably very good reasons for this, but I understand why it's frustrating for many people. This is a complex, sensitive, and high-profile case that may not be nearly as obvious and straightforward as many people think. We don't know what we don't know.
www.princegeorgecitizen.com
Exactly, there were waaaay better suspects than Jordy almost right from the beginning...... but no talk of them at all. Why didn't they go into detail about them? (these 'brothers' are not stupid either, they knew.... did RCMP really think they could 'mislead' them???)
Thanks for your elaborating! I pretty much agree with all you said.
You understand ignoring valid leads caused by being blindsided with already chosen narrative?
Sure. But sometimes agency's are 'understaffed', tight budget etc. Even if they want they just can't follow every lead they got. They have to make decisions sometimes...... And they have a lot more crimes to solve than Maddy's case. However I think they lacked some communication towards the public..... And sometimes 100% is 100%, for instance check the 'Murdaugh' case', that to me is 100%. Sorry if some folkes still think different....
That's also the issue pretty much every investigator has to face but the basic rules say that all leads should be followed, and even if some hard decisions had to be made (as choosing the most promising leads cause of tight budget, lack of staff and limited time) resulting with only the most promising leads being investigated, then still ignoring any valid leads is criminal attitude and if consistently applied to all cases will result with lots of false convictions and increasing lack of trust from the public - eventually causing LE to have it harder every time.
Lets agree to disagree on that.
It's rare for gov't investigators to publicly accuse or discuss specific active suspects who are not yet charged in a case. More common for them to talk about cleared suspects, as we saw in this case. They don't want to show their hand unless absolutely necessary, and pushing too hard can cause people to cease any cooperation that may have existed. Also possible defamation and legal issues if they publicly accuse innocent people.
globalnews.ca
i have no idea. I think that has been rumoured but with out a proper source it doesnt mean much
What? Described by the town? Described by who? Violent gang? You think they would volunteer to have a person buried on their property? Paid to help out? I'm not sure what kind of place you think we all live in up here, but you got it right when you said a bunch of assumptions.
Well, a stick and upside down stool in dark, wet basement was and still is very popular among those keen to get fast results - yet is banned where the priority is to put criminals behind bars, not just have it like 60:40 with scapegoats.
Re: violent gang? Probably is in reference to this. No comment on the rest.
Yah, Fort St. James. Nothing to do with Vanderhoof. They've arrested the people responsible. People say lot's of things to get out of giving statements to police. Never had any violent gangs in Vanderhoof.
I wasn't making any comment about what I think about 'Mr. Big stings' one way or another. Clearly there can be problems and complications resulting from these kinds of tactics. But they've also been used effectively, including in Frib's case.
www.princegeorgecitizen.com
You didn't, I commented on it. And I agreed that it's very effective, and so is the method I mentioned. It surely puts someone behind bars and gives community a sense of peace that justice has been served.I wasn't making any comment about what I think about 'Mr. Big stings' one way or another. Clearly there can be problems and complications resulting from these kinds of tactics. But they've also been used effectively, including in Frib's case.
Accused murderer's motive for dismembering body remains mystery
Little light was shed during a trial Tuesday on why a man accused of first-degree murder chopped off the victim’s head in the process of disposing of his body. James David Junior Charlie faces the count in the January 2012 death of Fribjon Bjornson.
