Canada - Richard Oland, 69, brutally murdered, St John, NB, 7 July 2011

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

I haven't quite made it through the entire interview. I am finding it informative but I have to say that I feel a bit guilty hearing about the details of their family. I want to watch the interview for the case-relevant points, but that causes me to hear about their private family matters. I feel for Connie and their kids. They don't deserve this intrusion into their lives. :(

I definitely want the guilty party to receive justice, but no doubt there will be 'collateral damage' to innocent parties.

:(

ETA: I should add that I was surprised with how "chatty" Dennis was. Every time the interrogator asked a question, Dennis would ramble on for 15 or 20 minutes. It's almost like he wanted to "share". He had a lot to share about his father and their relationship. It is certainly clear that Dennis didn't have an 'easy' upbringing around his dad.
 
Arnie M said:
.

Anyone else watch the police interview ?? I did , pretty long .... 2 1/2 hours .... Dennis sure seemed relaxed and easy going , answered all the questions without being evasive .... hard to tell just from a video but he does not have guilt written all over him.

Toward the end he got all messed up about explaining why he came and left and then came back . He said he arrived around 5:15 ish to drop off some genealogy info for his dad , then realized he left part of it in his office , went back to get it and realized his office would be closed by then , so came back and gave his dad what he had.

I found the genealogy part quite interesting and made sense why they were so involved in it , turns out one of the ancestors had an "illegitimate" child and nobody knew who the father was .... but Dennis had found an old Will written by the father that stated it was his son , pretty good sleuthing if you ask me. It was the Will information he forgot to bring along with the other genealogy papers.

Anyway , I wouldn't want to be on that Jury , some things (jacket) look suspicious but the blunders during the police investigation could sow plenty of seeds of doubt. Like I said , glad I'm not on the jury

Police interview http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/dennis-oland-murder-statement-1.3281699
Click to expand...

BBM

I'm about half way into the interview and I have to agree with the bolded part. Dennis just seemed to be saying what came into his mind....not guarded in his comments at all.

On the other hand, Dennis clearly had issues with his father, who was clearly a challenging personality. Dennis also didn't seem particularly upset that his father was dead. I did find that strange.

I DO NOT envy the jury at all. They have a tough decision ahead of them.

Off to listen to the rest of the interview. Perhaps it will be more telling?
 
Snoopster said:
BBM

I'm about half way into the interview and I have to agree with the bolded part. Dennis just seemed to be saying what came into his mind....not guarded in his comments at all.

On the other hand, Dennis clearly had issues with his father, who was clearly a challenging personality. Dennis also didn't seem particularly upset that his father was dead. I did find that strange.

I DO NOT envy the jury at all. They have a tough decision ahead of them.

Off to listen to the rest of the interview. Perhaps it will be more telling?
Click to expand...

Nice to read your thoughts on the interview, Snoopster and Arnie.

I agree with you both - this will be a tough one for the jury.

My thoughts on the interview:

Dennis is quite relaxed and at ease. This bothers me. He has just that day learned his dad is dead, and knows that he has been murdered. I don't think at the time of the interview that police had come right out and said that, but Dennis knows it and says as much to Davidson several times in the interview. He should be upset and full of questions, IMO. Never once does Dennis express shock or dismay that his dad is dead. Remember, he just saw his dad - spent an hour with him - the night before.

Speaking of Dennis knowing that the police are investigating a murder, when the interview finally gets going (around 28m), Davidson asks Dennis if he has anything on his mind and Dennis right away suggests that it was maybe a crackhead, or his dad was in the wrong place at the wrong time, but then says maybe it just was a reaction to a drug. I think he's overplaying puzzlement at this point, pretending not to have any idea what it could be. I also think at this point it would be very natural to ask the constable for more details of what has happened to his father.

Throughout the interview Dennis never misses an opportunity to talk about what a hard to get along with guy his dad was. While this may be completely true, it bothers me that he goes into detail so many different times and in so many different ways about his dad's faults during this interview. Remember, he has just learned his dad has been murdered. Foremost in his mind should be - what happened? I just saw him! I am disturbed to see him guffawing with Davidson as he relates many anecdotes about how difficult his dad could be.

At around 1:23 in the video Dennis is asked point blank if he had anything to do with his dad's death. He responds "No. I have no reason to want my father dead, to kill him...No. We had our things, but I wouldn't rob someone of the fun that they're having, you know, it's just...no." This denial really raises a red flag for me. First, he doesn't come out and say, "No, of course I didn't kill my dad!" I would expect a vehement denial here, but there is only a few "No"s and a weak statement about how he "wouldn't rob someone of the fun they're having.." Wait, what? Who is "someone"? He's distancing himself. This is about his dad's murder, not a vague "someone".

A little bit later Davidson asks him if h can think of anyone would benefit from his father's death. Dennis responds, "Someone who wanted $20 out of a wallet to buy drugs? Um, this is reaching - a vindictive ex-girlfriend?" Then he laughs. Big red flag. His dad is dead. He realizes it's a murder investigation. He considers who might have done it and then laughs. Again, at this point I think it would be expected that he question the constable - "Hey, what the heck is going on here? What happened to my Dad?"

Dennis talks about Richard's mistress: "The only person that comes to mind is this supposed girlfriend because she really seems to be a whackjob. Like they call her the dragon lady, you know, she, she's this hostile, uh, somebody who you think could be that Fatal Attraction type person, um, but that's just, I don't know..."

At about 1:48 Dennis again talks to Davidson about how he knows his dad didn't die naturally, based on the police behaviour. But again, he doesn't ask Davidson what is going on - how did his dad die, what are the police doing about it, is the family safe, what time did it happen, etc. etc.

I have to run now, but will post more later. Transcriptions are mine and likely not 100% accurate. :D Video times are also approximate.
 
More on the interview:

At about 1:50 in the video Dennis again mentions that it might have been a crackhead that killed his dad to steal $20 for a fix. Earlier in the interview he mentions "electronics" as a possible goal for the robbery. He mentions $20 taken from Richard's wallet at least twice in the interview. Wouldn't a murderous robber take everything they could? However, it would be hard to prove or disprove $20 taken from a wallet. Electronics stolen as a motive (remember the missing phone)? I think Dennis is planting ideas here.

At about the 2 hour mark in the interview, Davidson starts getting a little more blunt with Dennis, IMO. He really tries to firm Dennis up on his times and routes when he made the two trips to his dad's office. Dennis doesn't want to commit to particular routes quite a few times. In response to questioning if he took a certain street, he answers by saying he thinks he did, that would be the logical route and other noncommittal answers. This was the night before. Why can't he remember exactly which route he took? The more Davidson tries to pin him down, the quieter he gets. He finally admits to remembering that he went the wrong way on a one-way street. What really strikes me in all this is how calm Dennis stays. That calm, relaxed demeanour Dennis has at the beginning of the interview? Well, he still has it 2 hours later when Davidson is starting to get more aggressive with him. Davidson has come right out and told Dennis he needs to be very precise with his times and routes and that Davidson doesn't want any more mistakes like when Dennis suddenly realizes that he does remember his specific route - he went the wrong way on a one-way street. Davidson is sounding somewhat suspicious and definitely not as affable. Dennis gets quieter, but doesn't say, "Hey, wait a minute here! I didn't do anything, why are you questioning me like this?"

At 2:22 Davidson leaves the room and Dennis goes over his routes with his car, talking to himself and using his finger to draw the route on the table. It really feels to me like he is playing for the camera.

All of these observations are of course shaped by my own life experience and ideas. It's possible Dennis is completely innocent. I don't think he is. I think he was hurt, rejected, made to feel small and inadequate by his father all of his life. I think that festered for a long, long time. I think he saw killing his Dad as a way to get out of the suffocating financial hole he had dug himself and a way to get rid of someone he really hated. I think he planned this for awhile. I think he talked himself out of doing it on his first trip to Richard's office that day and then steeled his resolve and went back. I think he got rid of Richard's phone at the wharf. I don't know the answer to a lot of other things, but that's OK - because fortunately I am not on that jury. :)

Video at link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/dennis-oland-murder-statement-1.3281699
 
Trial coverage, November 23, 2015:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/oland-trial-dna-jacket-1.3330854

Doesn't sound like much was learned in court today. Unless you wanted to learn about how DNA comparison works. :D

A ​DNA scientist who analyzed samples related to the 2011 bludgeoning death of Richard Oland testified Monday at the second-degree murder trial of the victim's son, Dennis Oland.

Joy Kearsey, who worked at the RCMP forensics lab in Halifax up until it closed last year, prepared 11 reports on the Oland case, the Saint John Court of Queen's Bench heard.

She had three binders containing 1,400 pages beside her on the witness stand, but did not get to any of her specific findings.

Instead, Kearsey spent the day leading the jury through a PowerPoint presentation, explaining how scientists are able to take a known DNA sample of a person and compare it to an unknown sample taken from a crime scene to determine whether they match.
Click to expand...
 
Just catching up here,but was there actually video surveillance in the office building? What about murder for hire?Any sense of that?
 
.

Timeline from the surveillance video http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/oland-trial-video-alibi-1.3290384

5:08 (Color) seen leaving his workplace office
5:16 (Color) his car seen driving under street clock
5:25 (Black and White) (parking lot video) he parks on street at fathers office (watch upper right hand corner )
6:12 (Color) seen on street with bag , leaving office
6:13 (B&W parking lot video) seen returning to car
6:14 looks like he gets out of car
6:15 gets back into car
6:15 car drives away
6:21 car seen driving by the office again (B&W)
6:21 car seen on street again (Color)

Then drives home with a stop at the wharf , changes to leisure clothes , drives to the store and is seen shopping with his wife at 7:38 looking relaxed and normal.

Remember the B&W parking lot video is 58 minutes slow , probably to do with daylight savings time .

Random thoughts:
--- his police interview reconciles with the times on the cameras
--- I think the secretary said she left at 5:45 ish , both Dennis & Dick were engrossed in the genealogy stuff , and didn't seem to notice her say "see you fellas"
--- that leaves only about 20-25 minutes to have the genealogy conversation , and bludgeon 40 times and appear back on the street looking neat and tidy and normal at 6:12
--- The only thing I question is he said he first parked in the gravel lot beside his fathers car , went to fathers office , turned around and went back to car to pick up genealogy stuff he forgot , changed his mind and came back to office (and then presumably parked on street)
--- That (first parking) would have to happen between 5:16 and 5:25 which is only 9 minutes , but with the clock error it could be 11 minutes , so it is entirely possible I guess. If I was on the jury I would side with Dennis' version of the timeline , the videos tend to confirm it.

So far the only hinky part is the jacket stains and dry cleaning the next day. What time did he learn of his fathers death ? .... and why would a person care about going to the cleaners at a time like that ??
 
What about the wharf, Arnie? That really sticks out for me. Your wife is sick and annoyed that you've been gone so long, so you not only stop at the wharf, but get out of your vehicle and sit at the wharf? It would make sense to me if he had just quickly looked and then continued on home, OR if he'd stayed at the wharf for a bit (not sure I'd be in a rush to get home to my sick, angry spouse ;) ) but Dennis himself said he hurried home to Lisa because he was late. He really downplayed this wharf stop in his interview. He gave many other details, but skimmed right over this one.

We all know from reading the news and this forum that murder doesn't take long. And that it's possible for someone to commit the most vile acts we can think of and seem perfectly normal afterwards.

I think it didn't take Dennis long to kill his dad, and I think he had planned his times out well beforehand. I think Maureen's presence and then departure was important - he had to be able to show an innocent reason he was at his dad's office, but he needed Maureen gone before he could actually kill Richard. When Davidson asks Dennis why he thinks it was about 5:15 when he arrived at his dad's office (around 2:03 in the interview), Dennis says because Maureen left around 5:30, so it was 10-20 minutes before that. Wouldn't it be more natural to think it was 5:15 because you finished work at 5:00 and it took you 10-20 minutes to leave your office and get to your dad's office? Basing his timeline around Maureen's departure shows me how important that departure was to Dennis. I thought he and his dad had hardly noticed when she left? (according to Maureen's testimony it was closer to 5:45, but I think that could be off)

I'd be very interested to know what Dennis' personality was like before this. Was he always cool as a cucumber, not getting rattled by anything?
 
jillybean51 said:
Just catching up here,but was there actually video surveillance in the office building? What about murder for hire?Any sense of that?
Click to expand...

What an interesting thought, jillybean! I am going to have to ponder that one. Did Dennis set the stage, let someone in after Maureen left? Hmmm
 
redheart said:
What an interesting thought, jillybean! I am going to have to ponder that one. Did Dennis set the stage, let someone in after Maureen left? Hmmm
Click to expand...

I have considered that too .... or did he slip back in later through the unlocked back door .

But it would all come down to him knowing if and where there were cameras in the area. Did he even know about the restaurant one in front of the office.

And yes , the wharf stop seemed out of place , but on the other hand it sounds like the times his kids were with his ex he would try to encounter them in other places , like the wharf or whatever.

I keep thinking if he did do it he is sure a smooth operator , and was it pure luck he didn't get completely spattered with blood ?.. Police say the blood spattered up to 3 meters around the office.
 
Arnie M said:
I have considered that too .... or did he slip back in later through the unlocked back door .

But it would all come down to him knowing if and where there were cameras in the area. Did he even know about the restaurant one in front of the office.

And yes , the wharf stop seemed out of place , but on the other hand it sounds like the times his kids were with his ex he would try to encounter them in other places , like the wharf or whatever.

I keep thinking if he did do it he is sure a smooth operator , and was it pure luck he didn't get completely spattered with blood ?.. Police say the blood spattered up to 3 meters around the office.
Click to expand...

I would pass off the wharf visit except for knowing that he didn't just quickly look to see if his kids were there - he got out and picked something up and sat at the end of it. That's not looking for his kids. Oh, and that Richard's phone last pinged from the tower nearest the wharf.

Agreed, Arnie, the lack of blood on Dennis doesn't make sense to me. One of the reasons I'm glad not to be on that jury!
 
Maybe he picked the phone up,which was covered in blood,getting a few spots on his jacket,before throwing it in the water.The big question is...how did the phone arrive there before Dennis?
 
jillybean51 said:
Maybe he picked the phone up,which was covered in blood,getting a few spots on his jacket,before throwing it in the water.The big question is...how did the phone arrive there before Dennis?
Click to expand...

What do you mean?
 
The phone pinged at the wharf so it was likely nearby.Perhaps the paid killer had told Dennis he threw the weapon and phone in the water there and Dennis stopped to check it out ,spotting the phone on the ground,that was dropped,picking it up and throwing it in the water himself.A few drops of blood came in contact with his jacket.
 
[video=twitter;669181029136138240]https://twitter.com/mikecameronctv/status/669181029136138240[/video]
Why was there blood on paper towel in the bathroom,with DNA belonging to McFadden?(as per today in court?)
 
Not sure why you would take RHO's iPhone unless you thought your DNA was on it, or you were keenly interested in the phone numbers/messages.

Hypothetically...

If you were on your way home to Rothesay with the murder weapon in your reusable grocery bag and the iPhone 4 sang out with a text message at 6:44pm, that might make you panic a little bit and get off the highway at Fox Farm Road to the Renforth wharf and water. Perhaps when you get there you become aware that there are people sitting in their cars with a full view of your activities so you pretend to pick up shells or stones. With the iPhone4 shut off or smashed it's not going to ping anywhere else after that.

I can't find where DO states his exact route home, but if he left Canterbury St. in uptown SJ at 6:30ish he'd probably be on the Mackay Highway (Route 1) right around the Fox Farm Road which is very close that cell tower at Riverside Country Club (Rothesay Rogers Tower). (In the 2hour+ police interview DO says it's about 15 minutes from RHO's office to Renforth wharf.)

If DO took the the iPhone and murder weapon away from the Renforth wharf then, IMO, it probably went home with him as it's quite populated between Renforth and his house on Gondola Point Road. I don't think you'd risk throwing anything out the car window.

JMO
 
If Dennis was at the wharf at 6:44, I think his looking at the object in his hand was him reading the somewhat peed off text from Richard's gf. If it was just a found item, why would he just happen to have a grocery bag in his hand in which to place a newly found item. Unless I missed it ... has he been asked WHAT it was that he picked up and put in the bag?

His interrogation reference to a vindictive ex-girlfriend is curious as it appears Richard and DS were still an item at the time of his death as she was expecting contact from him. The "ex" part seems to be in Dennis' mind only (unless he was referring to a gf other than DS). IMO, Dennis wouldn't have referred to Connie as Richard's ex-wife. Have a feeling Dennis took delight in DS "dragon lady" now being an ex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 175 more.
Total: 2,742 (members: 176, guests: 2,566)

Online statistics

Members online
176
Guests online
2,566
Total visitors
2,742
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,229
Messages
18,169,262
Members
232,163
Latest member
immsbhaven
Back
Top