GUILTY Canada - Noelle Paquette, 27, Sarnia, Ont, 31 Dec 2012 - #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Yes, I saw that somewhere else. She married the brother of the lawyer who defended her...Like, really? My first thought was, that would be an uncomforable Christmas dinner at my house if she was my new daughter in law. The mother of my grandchild....I forgot to wonder why the brother even *wanted* to date her in the first place, and bring her home to meet mom...but that is me...

Again...I devour psychology books....

redheadedgal said:
yw

if you get bored, here's the most recent KH thread... feel free to add your thoughts... i'll be reading :)

Karla Homolka married with child - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
Click to expand...
 
Thank you...I didn't realize it was a whole thread! Going to go and read!

I was looking up other crimes I knew and wondered if they were here...but they were cut and dried crimes of passion...sad all the same...they were great people who I knew and knew of (met)...They were from here also, and never thought to look before...

Vanessa Bol, 17 shot by Emerson Dominguez...2003 I think...she had a new boyfriend, but the 7 month old daughter was his, he went nuts....

John Daubs, drugged his 2 daughters and dog after a fun weekend of camping, said goodbye to his neighbours at camp, and then drove into a dump truck killing everyone inside in 2006. Wife was leaving him, he took what she loved most...

Neither could have been prevented...both planned out of rage...

The Bernardo's...crimes committed not out of rage, or crime of passion...they were predators...as are Noelle's killers...

Will read the thread tomorrow that you posted, and hope to find something "new"..Thanks!

redheadedgal said:
the thread encompasses waay more than her having kids ;)
Click to expand...
 
ethelemu said:
C'mon people, irrespective of a publication ban applying only to one province or one country, the admins/mods have already said in the first post what they do and don't want discussed in this thread. Whether it flies in the face of your first amendment or not, the admins and mods run the place and their rules for continued discussion, have already been spoken of.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Their forum...their rules.
 
The forum rules, that have been posted a few times throughout the 4 threads and we have been reminded of, state that posting rumors and heresay is frowned upon, as are the family members (adults and children) of victims and accused are off limits to discuss. The rules state to stick to what is being reported in main stream media.

The only thing the publication ban has to do with anything, is that now even less will be released by the media. This generally lasts until the jury goes to deliberations.

Unfortunately there will be few answers for a few years. The accused likely will make numerous court appearances before anything close to a trial begins. Using Victoria Stafford's case as a basis, if one of the accused pleads guilty and the other goes to trial, the general public wont know about it until the preliminary trial hearings begin. It's all to protect the integrity of the case, whether we like it or agree with it or not. The media is only allowed to discuss what the jury hears. Since there's no jury as of yet....there's little to report.

The mods here get to decide what they want the board to be, and it appears that is to be a respectful place to come and discuss the bad things in our world. I find this place to be very informative and a great site to visit. And reading these four threads through and through, the mods have been VERY generous with how far things are allowed to go, despite numerous reminders.
 
Welcome to WebSleuths CanuckSleuth, Ninae and crowstoes ! (Did I miss anyone????)

:greetings:
 
SpriteGal said:
I guess I am confused, as a site isn't this a united states based site, so what does that mean for here? I mean obviously they can't do anything to a website forum of americans? No offense to anyone, but like if an american news site wanted to publish an article about this case they could, as rights protect that. So I guess I am confused why can't people speculate any more? If it is the to respect the ban, i get that but legally us americans could speculate to the moon and back about a case without any reprecussions correct? As mentioned it just boggles my mind a bit, and am confused. I don't mean to disrespect or offend anybody I just want a clearer picture.
Click to expand...

I am totally with you on this post. We have 3 previous threads full of 'speculation, rumours' I mean...those can be erased and removed...but it's still out there. I would imagine going forward, if the media (wherever) posts something, we can still chit-chat about it and even if it isn't posted by the media and as long as it is pure speculation...that would be up to us??? People still care, and want to the bottom of this. Are we, the people...supposed to just 'forget' and meet back in a few years time :p
 
Publication bans to not occur in all cases here in Canada. Just an FYI. What it does tell us is it's bad. Really bad. IMO. Sharp contrast to Florida who has the Sunshine Law. As much as I love having access to most Discovery it sure can turn a case into a Circus. As we saw in the Anthony Trial. So we see two extremes here. Each have an argument of their own. One day the Publication Ban may be challenged and won. I do know it has been challenged but a "weak" challenge at best. I mean who really wants to take it on when bans are in place for such horrific and heinous crimes. For now. It is what it is :rose:
 
Over the last few years I have received 3 summons for Jury Duty. Each time before i was to appear I rec'd a call the case had been settled out of Court. So i was never part of the process as far as even being chosen. Now I figure I should disclose I am a member on several crime boards right? Now i figure that should get me out of Jury Duty right? if it was a Crminal case :floorlaugh: That's certainly my hope :floorlaugh:
 
Bravo said:
Over the last few years I have received 3 summons for Jury Duty. Each time before i was to appear I rec'd a call the case had been settled out of Court. So i was never part of the process as far as even being chosen. Now I figure I should disclose I am a member on several crime boards right? Now i figure that should get me out of Jury Duty right? if it was a Crminal case :floorlaugh: That's certainly my hope :floorlaugh:
Click to expand...

I would like to be called for jury trial just once. I would like to see the process first hand. I think it would be informative. I also think it would usually be very boring. ;)
 
Quote from Bravo,
"Publication bans to not occur in all cases here in Canada. Just an FYI. What it does tell us is it's bad. Really bad. IMO..............."

Dosen't it though protect the accused in a crime and hopefully go towards a fair and just trial?
If all the evidence was disclosed in the press for everyone to read, finding people who are comletely unaware of all the circumstances (and had not formed an opinion about the case in their own mind) who could fill a jury, would be very difficult I would think.
My own opinion
 
Frasier said:
Thanks for sharing everyone. I'll check in from time to time. <modsnip> Thanks Mods. I appreciate you stopping what was happening on the other threads. Have a great night everyone.
Click to expand...

My apologies. I didn't realize other users were not permitted to message each other / request messages on useful information on this site. I missed that in the rules. Again sorry for this.
 
Curiousonion said:
Quote from Bravo,
"Publication bans to not occur in all cases here in Canada. Just an FYI. What it does tell us is it's bad. Really bad. IMO..............."

Dosen't it though protect the accused in a crime and hopefully go towards a fair and just trial?
If all the evidence was disclosed in the press for everyone to read, finding people who are comletely unaware of all the circumstances (and had not formed an opinion about the case in their own mind) who could fill a jury, would be very difficult I would think.
My own opinion
Click to expand...

Absolutely. My point being in crimes such as this. High profile, a murder and horrific where the public and the press pay attention bans are in place. Not to say others that are say sexually based are not. Hope i am making myself clear. I guess what i am trying to say is an average run of the mill trial may not see a ban. IMO
 
Morning everyone.

Looks like you had quite an evening!

I think that other members here have helped explain things pretty well. EVIDENCE in this case is not to be discussed in any form.

What that means to us and posting in this thread is that discussion of the following is off limits:

I think these points are clear and understandable:


  • Cause of death
  • any weapons
  • photos or videos of the alleged perps immediately prior to arrest, or within 24 hours (before or after) of the crime.


The below refers to EVIDENCE in the case, which I believe has not been released by law enforcement or the media to date. (Charge sheets, witness statements, police reports, medical examiners reports, physical evidence, etc)


  • No discussion of anything that may be used/discussed in Court during the trial to convict/exonerate the alleged perps.


Yes, you can still theorize/speculate as long as the discussion item is not part of the publication ban.

Salem (our resident expert) will jump in if I have mis-interpreted, when she can!!!!

For the first amendment questions:

Rules Etiquette & Information - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Freedom of Speech:

While we believe very much in the freedom of speech & expression, you DO NOT have an absolute right to say whatever you want in this community. WS is based in the United States, but is not an agency of the Federal or any State government - so the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution and similar State amendments regarding your right to free speech DO NOT APPLY HERE.
Click to expand...

Courts are tending towards the view that "social media sites" are (a type of) PUBLICATION. This includes Facebook, and sites like WebSleuths, where your words can be read by the "world". Facebook has cooperated with law enforcement officials in high profile cases to provide personal details (via subpoena request) of people who post for the purpose of interviewing, prosecuting, etc. WebSleuths also cooperates with law enforcement. It doesn't matter where you "sit" to type at your computer. The nature of Internet websites is "global" readership. (Potential or realized)

We have a publication ban at this time (Australia) in the Jill Meagher case thread also. Just FYI.

And yes. It is all about justice for victims and fairness for those whom are innocent until proven guilty!

I hope this helps a bit.
 
Noelle's gift is now @ $27,300! This makes my heart very happy to know that her legacy will carry on. :)

Rest Peacefully Noelle.

noellesgift.ca
 
Benz1230 said:
Noelle's gift is now @ $27,300! This makes my heart very happy to know that her legacy will carry on. :)

Rest Peacefully Noelle.

noellesgift.ca
Click to expand...

That is such good news :rose:
 
is there a thread about mr Khan the man who won the lottery and died the next day?? i just saw on news his wife has the dry cleaning buisness open and shes working there... if was my spouse i couldnt work a few days after all this happened
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 82 more.
Total: 1,468 (members: 83, guests: 1,385)

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
1,385
Total visitors
1,468
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,283
Messages
18,093,881
Members
230,841
Latest member
FastRayne
Back
Top