Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 - #2 *killer identified*
- Thread starter Dedpanman
- Start date
-
CA CA - San Francisco, California Wht Male 20-30 hanging from tree Feb 82- Latest: The4TierBridge
-
- Status
I believe what you are seeing Ken is what blocks the road and what stands in your way to everyone coming together and going the same direction from here. What I wrote is just what the average person would glean from all the readily available public documents including the Kaufman inquiry.
I hear you Ken and I did try to get the odd man out segment even willing to pay the going price. The archive was not listed or at least I never found it. I contacted the CBC contact email and asked for it and for a price. I never got a response. You note the price of the transcript and few are going to be able to pay that.
I believe dedpanman had asked for a copy and thought it may be forhcoming. So, I hope you understand no one is trying to disrespect you or anything of the sort, just trying to show how difficult it is for everyone to get past all the "minutia" so we can all move along.
I thought W. boiled it down to the simplest form possible with her statement-
As said in the Kaufman report, the inquiry into both trials still places the Horwood sighting at Leslie and Queensville sideroad. The Fieldstone Lane left turn is noted as well the dscription of the Horwoods following the car. It is rather detailed and specific. The Horwoods would have given a Police statement back at the time. It may not have been given the defence. But.. To provide false information to the court or to the inquiry claiming the sighting was elsewhere than the original Horwood statement claimed is really really hard to farthom.
If as dedpanman once said, the odd man out segment had the story straight, and the prosecution fabricated evidence at trial and that story predated the inquiry, why was that not addressed at the inquiry? If the Horwood sighting information was knowingly false and that false information was then allowed to be inserted into the inquiry and to go uncontested at the inquiry, "that is huge"
Why was it not addressed back then? The inquiry was supposed to get to the facts and clear misconceptions..
It is a huge roadblock Ken and really tough to understand how that could all be.
Recently out in my part of the country a bigtime news show showed up to do a story on a missing person and according the participants, it was the news show that got the details all wrong, even taking the participants own words out of context. Did that happen in odd man out too? Is that why it wasn't re-addressed or contested at the inquiry?
We are at the point we may all be able to move along.. If we can put a few last points into context and perspective within our own understanding.. That is different than expecting people to just take the leap of faith.. Have patience and help us understand what happened and we may all move along together.. Your biggest questioners could become your biggest backers.
sorry if it seemed more was being said than that..
from W.
I hear you Ken and I did try to get the odd man out segment even willing to pay the going price. The archive was not listed or at least I never found it. I contacted the CBC contact email and asked for it and for a price. I never got a response. You note the price of the transcript and few are going to be able to pay that.
I believe dedpanman had asked for a copy and thought it may be forhcoming. So, I hope you understand no one is trying to disrespect you or anything of the sort, just trying to show how difficult it is for everyone to get past all the "minutia" so we can all move along.
I thought W. boiled it down to the simplest form possible with her statement-
As said in the Kaufman report, the inquiry into both trials still places the Horwood sighting at Leslie and Queensville sideroad. The Fieldstone Lane left turn is noted as well the dscription of the Horwoods following the car. It is rather detailed and specific. The Horwoods would have given a Police statement back at the time. It may not have been given the defence. But.. To provide false information to the court or to the inquiry claiming the sighting was elsewhere than the original Horwood statement claimed is really really hard to farthom.
If as dedpanman once said, the odd man out segment had the story straight, and the prosecution fabricated evidence at trial and that story predated the inquiry, why was that not addressed at the inquiry? If the Horwood sighting information was knowingly false and that false information was then allowed to be inserted into the inquiry and to go uncontested at the inquiry, "that is huge"
Why was it not addressed back then? The inquiry was supposed to get to the facts and clear misconceptions..
It is a huge roadblock Ken and really tough to understand how that could all be.
Recently out in my part of the country a bigtime news show showed up to do a story on a missing person and according the participants, it was the news show that got the details all wrong, even taking the participants own words out of context. Did that happen in odd man out too? Is that why it wasn't re-addressed or contested at the inquiry?
We are at the point we may all be able to move along.. If we can put a few last points into context and perspective within our own understanding.. That is different than expecting people to just take the leap of faith.. Have patience and help us understand what happened and we may all move along together.. Your biggest questioners could become your biggest backers.
sorry if it seemed more was being said than that..
from W.
I know that W, as well I know Ken would not agree either. You both have had your own views for a very long time and each of you has your own poi you are building a case for. Before we retreat to the entrenched duelling suspects debate again, I would like to see the parameters changed a bit. There may be other explanations for many a point on here as shown and some need be brought to some sort of a conclusion in order to get beyond and set the direction going forward.
The current thinking by Ken has him convinced this will never be solved. The box that contains any chance has been sealed to new thought, new input, new ideas. I deliberately wrote from a different viewpoint as if the Horwood sighting as described in the Kaufman report were true. You change one thing and everything else should change accordingly.
As I have said numerous times, and has been answered the same insufficient way numerous times, the Horwood sighting had the potential to tell us something very important, no matter which suspect anyone wishes to entertain. Sorry to temporarily distract from all that but the circumstance being described by Ken in regard the Horwood sighting has never been seen anywhere before in any of the other official inquiries in the country. The very purpose and nature of the inquiry process is to cut through stuff like this and get to the truth. If the truth of this has truly been subverted in the Kaufman inquiry to the degree described, it is a very very important point to understand going forward. It shouldn't be glossed over.
No one is supposed to be exempt from being called, none too high, and nothing too sacred to be asked in an official inquiry or so we have been led to believe. Yet we have here before us to this day what is potentially the most important piece of evidence being treated like this? The report into the Kaufman inquiry still publishes the lie to this day? No one sees the proof that shows otherwise, there is no mention of the discrepancy in the Kaufman report and no problem was recognized with the location of the Horwood sighting in any of the inquiry discussion from what I can find. No one said a word?
I can not find the odd man out segment, I do not have 1700.00 to spend on the transcript. It is not being supplied here.
For Ken, this is the point where many may leave your camp and you to your own devices. We don't mean to abandon your sister or calls for justice. The murder of your sister has been talked into a box by the current discussion with no way out. IMO To go on to the next step as you would like us, how do we reconcile things like the Horwoods to get beyond without seeing some proof? Direct us to it, how to get a copy from the CBC or the name and date, the reporter's name in order to seek further. It's just due diligence. We would be blindly following without. Not everyone is comfortable with doing that. There is near precedent setting circumstance to get over here that will continue to pose problems for you going forward until addressed. IMO
Anyone can be duped into believing things without having nefarious intent or an agenda, it happens, our perceptions once built are hard to dispel. I believe this to be the most important point in the entire discussion to clarify no matter where the truth of it leads. Facts are different than subjective perception.
Did the fifth estate get it right, date of publication?
Did the second trial get it right, transcript page and date?
or...Did the Kaufman inquiry have it right?
How do we know?
I will leave you to do with it as you please here. I've asked repeatedly, I've said enough. I am not comfortable taking the leap of faith yet myself and I have explained why. I'm sure others will have more to say and perhaps some concensus will come in time. Have patience, no ill will is intended by people asking questions and trying to explain why they ask. Don't run for the hills for think about it this way; If the official Kaufman report contains false information, that could posssibly be one of the best if not the only avenue left open to force action. It should be rectified..
The current thinking by Ken has him convinced this will never be solved. The box that contains any chance has been sealed to new thought, new input, new ideas. I deliberately wrote from a different viewpoint as if the Horwood sighting as described in the Kaufman report were true. You change one thing and everything else should change accordingly.
As I have said numerous times, and has been answered the same insufficient way numerous times, the Horwood sighting had the potential to tell us something very important, no matter which suspect anyone wishes to entertain. Sorry to temporarily distract from all that but the circumstance being described by Ken in regard the Horwood sighting has never been seen anywhere before in any of the other official inquiries in the country. The very purpose and nature of the inquiry process is to cut through stuff like this and get to the truth. If the truth of this has truly been subverted in the Kaufman inquiry to the degree described, it is a very very important point to understand going forward. It shouldn't be glossed over.
No one is supposed to be exempt from being called, none too high, and nothing too sacred to be asked in an official inquiry or so we have been led to believe. Yet we have here before us to this day what is potentially the most important piece of evidence being treated like this? The report into the Kaufman inquiry still publishes the lie to this day? No one sees the proof that shows otherwise, there is no mention of the discrepancy in the Kaufman report and no problem was recognized with the location of the Horwood sighting in any of the inquiry discussion from what I can find. No one said a word?
I can not find the odd man out segment, I do not have 1700.00 to spend on the transcript. It is not being supplied here.
For Ken, this is the point where many may leave your camp and you to your own devices. We don't mean to abandon your sister or calls for justice. The murder of your sister has been talked into a box by the current discussion with no way out. IMO To go on to the next step as you would like us, how do we reconcile things like the Horwoods to get beyond without seeing some proof? Direct us to it, how to get a copy from the CBC or the name and date, the reporter's name in order to seek further. It's just due diligence. We would be blindly following without. Not everyone is comfortable with doing that. There is near precedent setting circumstance to get over here that will continue to pose problems for you going forward until addressed. IMO
Anyone can be duped into believing things without having nefarious intent or an agenda, it happens, our perceptions once built are hard to dispel. I believe this to be the most important point in the entire discussion to clarify no matter where the truth of it leads. Facts are different than subjective perception.
Did the fifth estate get it right, date of publication?
Did the second trial get it right, transcript page and date?
or...Did the Kaufman inquiry have it right?
How do we know?
I will leave you to do with it as you please here. I've asked repeatedly, I've said enough. I am not comfortable taking the leap of faith yet myself and I have explained why. I'm sure others will have more to say and perhaps some concensus will come in time. Have patience, no ill will is intended by people asking questions and trying to explain why they ask. Don't run for the hills for think about it this way; If the official Kaufman report contains false information, that could posssibly be one of the best if not the only avenue left open to force action. It should be rectified..
Is there any way you could scan the disclosure documents? Or host the odd man out video on a file sharing site? I realize this would probably be a huge inconvenience and time consuming, but if what you say is true it could possibly blow it wide open. I got hooked on this thread browsing the site and can't believe how much conflicting information everyone has, and the enormous amount of time people must have spent searching for the truth. I really am sorry Ken, I was just a kid when this happened myself, and I can't believe this case hasn't been solved yet with DNA evidence. Hopefully for your family's sake I hope someday it will be
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 215
This post is for KJessop.
KJessop Im wondering if you could look at this diagram I created of the Culls property where Christine was found back in late 84/early 85. I dont want to annoy you with minutiae, but you could help clear up any errors here once and for all. And I believe that I have made errors.
My reasons for bothering you with this:
Im thinking, that as we all move on (some day) from this case, we can pass the torch and leave behind the tools for other researchers who will undoubtedly follow us.
I feel like Im asking a lot... but, KJessop, if youre inclined...
Could you print out a hard copy of this PDF and scribble all over it? Cross things out, draw arrows to show where things should be until it jives with your memories and your knowledge of the spot as it was back then? Then, if you could scan the corrected diagram and post it back here... Ill do my best to fix it and create a final version.
I feel the diagram could be a powerful research tool as many of us feel (and perhaps you do, too?) that your sisters killer had some connection to that spot in Sunderland where her body was found... and the layout of the crime scene (where he chose to leave her) etc. can, or may reveal things about the perpetrator.
This diagram (when perfected) could be a great tool for future researchers who will follow.
It could also serve to help keep the story of Christine Jessop and what happened to her alive.
It will help her not be forgotten.
Sincerely,
Dedpanman
KJessop Im wondering if you could look at this diagram I created of the Culls property where Christine was found back in late 84/early 85. I dont want to annoy you with minutiae, but you could help clear up any errors here once and for all. And I believe that I have made errors.
My reasons for bothering you with this:
Im thinking, that as we all move on (some day) from this case, we can pass the torch and leave behind the tools for other researchers who will undoubtedly follow us.
I feel like Im asking a lot... but, KJessop, if youre inclined...
Could you print out a hard copy of this PDF and scribble all over it? Cross things out, draw arrows to show where things should be until it jives with your memories and your knowledge of the spot as it was back then? Then, if you could scan the corrected diagram and post it back here... Ill do my best to fix it and create a final version.
I feel the diagram could be a powerful research tool as many of us feel (and perhaps you do, too?) that your sisters killer had some connection to that spot in Sunderland where her body was found... and the layout of the crime scene (where he chose to leave her) etc. can, or may reveal things about the perpetrator.
This diagram (when perfected) could be a great tool for future researchers who will follow.
It could also serve to help keep the story of Christine Jessop and what happened to her alive.
It will help her not be forgotten.
Sincerely,
Dedpanman
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 215
Saw this detail that backs up KJessop. (Just an FYI - maybe you saw it already?)
Who murdered Christine Jessop? With Guy Paul Morin cleared, police tackle a fresh probe
By Moira Welsh and Jim Rankin Toronto Star. Toronto Star [Toronto, Ont] 23 June 1995
Story also appears in Oshawa/Durham edition on page OS1 and in Scarborough editon on page SC1. Photos appear on page OS2 and page SC2.
In the months following the discovery of Christine Jessop's remains in 1984, police investigated more than 350 potential suspects. They latched on to one - Guy Paul Morin, the slain child's neighbor in the small town of Queensville.
Ten years later, Morin has been cleared. Time has taken away vital pieces of the puzzle that Metro homicide detectives now face in their fresh probe of the sex slaying. But they have a new tool - a sequence of DNA taken from semen on the girl's underwear.
These are the stories of some of the strongest suspects cleared by Durham police. Because a court order protects their identities, their names have been changed for this story.
It could have been a child's secret hideaway, the kind of place a little girl might hope to find exploring in the woods.
A tiny clearing scented with sweet cedar trees where she could lie in the grass and gaze at the blue sky. A quiet spot, shared with the raccoons who left their paw prints behind.
Death's imprint lingers instead.
They found Christine Jessop among these trees. She'd been missing three months. There was little left of the tiny, 40-pound, 9-year-old.
Her head had been cut off. It was wrapped in a sweater, placed near her body. Her knees were drawn up and her legs were splayed.
She had been stabbed repeatedly. Her semen-stained underwear had been sliced by a knife .
Little has changed at Christine's death site - a private lot off an old country road in Brock Township. The cedars have grown higher. The grass is a little thicker. But the mystery around her murder has grown deeper.
And a killer still holds the secrets of her final moments.
**********
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 215
PLEASE NOTE: It was March 12, 1998, that police announced that the special task force into Christine Jessop's killing was being disbanded. This was the task force headed by Det.-Sgt. Neale Tweedy...
DNA boosts Jessop case: [1 Edition]
Tyler, Tracey. Toronto Star [Toronto, Ont] 20 Oct 1998: 1.
Tests zero in on profile of murder suspect
LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER
Experts at Toronto's Centre of Forensic Sciences have developed a more detailed profile of 9-year-old Christine Jessop's killer.
A series of recent tests at the centre have produced a more complex genetic fingerprint of the man who raped and murdered Christine 14 years ago this month. The new information will allow police to make an arrest with greater certainty.
Working with material extracted from decomposing semen found on Christine's underwear, Pamela Newall of the centre was able to amplify the DNA code unlocked during a historic lab test in Boston in 1995. That test led to the exoneration of Guy Paul Morin.
MORE PRECISE
"We've defined more precisely the composite DNA profile of the person whose DNA sample that is," Newall said in an interview.
"It's very informative," she added.
Morin, who once lived next door to the Jessops in Queensville, was wrongly convicted in 1992 of murdering Christine. Her skeletal remains were found near a woodlot in Brock Township in Durham Region on Dec. 31, 1984.
The tests in January, 1995 isolated four key genetic "markers" on the killer's DNA strand for comparison with Morin's, which didn't match.
Six more markers have been uncovered in six new tests at the centre, using methods of analysis even more refined than in 1995. Metro police, which wrapped up a re-investigation of the case last December, have suggested the best hope of making an arrest lies in finding a match between the DNA of the killer and someone already arrested or convicted on unrelated charges.
PERSON RESPONSIBLE
'There are those of us who have the firm belief that some time in the future, a 'hit' will be obtained that will at some point bring the person who is responsible for Christine Jessop's death to justice," Edward Blake, a California forensic serologist who participated in the test that freed Morin, told a DNA conference in Toronto on the weekend.
The conference was told that in New York state, the court of appeal has ruled a DNA "hit" by itself is sufficient grounds for a prosecution and proof beyond reasonable doubt of guilt.
The court was upholding the conviction of a man arrested on the basis of a DNA match.
Copyright 1998 Toronto Star, All Rights Reserved.
DNA boosts Jessop case: [1 Edition]
Tyler, Tracey. Toronto Star [Toronto, Ont] 20 Oct 1998: 1.
Tests zero in on profile of murder suspect
LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER
Experts at Toronto's Centre of Forensic Sciences have developed a more detailed profile of 9-year-old Christine Jessop's killer.
A series of recent tests at the centre have produced a more complex genetic fingerprint of the man who raped and murdered Christine 14 years ago this month. The new information will allow police to make an arrest with greater certainty.
Working with material extracted from decomposing semen found on Christine's underwear, Pamela Newall of the centre was able to amplify the DNA code unlocked during a historic lab test in Boston in 1995. That test led to the exoneration of Guy Paul Morin.
MORE PRECISE
"We've defined more precisely the composite DNA profile of the person whose DNA sample that is," Newall said in an interview.
"It's very informative," she added.
Morin, who once lived next door to the Jessops in Queensville, was wrongly convicted in 1992 of murdering Christine. Her skeletal remains were found near a woodlot in Brock Township in Durham Region on Dec. 31, 1984.
The tests in January, 1995 isolated four key genetic "markers" on the killer's DNA strand for comparison with Morin's, which didn't match.
Six more markers have been uncovered in six new tests at the centre, using methods of analysis even more refined than in 1995. Metro police, which wrapped up a re-investigation of the case last December, have suggested the best hope of making an arrest lies in finding a match between the DNA of the killer and someone already arrested or convicted on unrelated charges.
PERSON RESPONSIBLE
'There are those of us who have the firm belief that some time in the future, a 'hit' will be obtained that will at some point bring the person who is responsible for Christine Jessop's death to justice," Edward Blake, a California forensic serologist who participated in the test that freed Morin, told a DNA conference in Toronto on the weekend.
The conference was told that in New York state, the court of appeal has ruled a DNA "hit" by itself is sufficient grounds for a prosecution and proof beyond reasonable doubt of guilt.
The court was upholding the conviction of a man arrested on the basis of a DNA match.
Copyright 1998 Toronto Star, All Rights Reserved.
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 215
A few more specifics in regards to Christine's injuries are reported here:
Expert admits errors in Jessop's autopsy: [Final Edition]
Kitchener - Waterloo Record [Kitchener, Ont] 28 Jan 1992: A3.
Dr. John Hillsdon-Smith admitted he missed a severe skull fracture and numerous cuts to the nine-year-old's spine during his 1985 autopsy on her skeletal remains.
The skull fracture under the right eye would have been strong enough to leave the girl unconscious and could even have caused her death, he said while testifying at the second murder trial of Guy Paul Morin.
Hillsdon-Smith also agreed that some of the spinal cutting marks were suggestive of a "sawing motion."
Crown attorney Leo Maguigan had earlier suggested the injuries indicated an attempted decapitation.
As well, Hillsdon-Smith admitted he had failed to notice Christine's breast bone had been cut in two, a procedure he testified would "take a heavy instrument or saw."
The trial, now in its third month, has heard Christine's father, Robert Jessop, testify he found six of his daughter's bones during an impromptu visit to the isolated rural spot where her body had been found.
Christine had disappeared from the vicinity of her Queensville home, north of Toronto, on Oct. 3, 1984. Her badly decomposed body was found three months later.
Three months after that, Morin, Jessop's next-door neighbor, was charged with her murder.
Credit: CP
1992 The Record - Kitchener-Waterloo. All rights reserved.
The fracture to her skull was below her right eye. This is the first time I've found that particular injury's location clearly specified. Does this not suggest that Christine's killer was left handed?
Expert admits errors in Jessop's autopsy: [Final Edition]
Kitchener - Waterloo Record [Kitchener, Ont] 28 Jan 1992: A3.
Dr. John Hillsdon-Smith admitted he missed a severe skull fracture and numerous cuts to the nine-year-old's spine during his 1985 autopsy on her skeletal remains.
The skull fracture under the right eye would have been strong enough to leave the girl unconscious and could even have caused her death, he said while testifying at the second murder trial of Guy Paul Morin.
Hillsdon-Smith also agreed that some of the spinal cutting marks were suggestive of a "sawing motion."
Crown attorney Leo Maguigan had earlier suggested the injuries indicated an attempted decapitation.
As well, Hillsdon-Smith admitted he had failed to notice Christine's breast bone had been cut in two, a procedure he testified would "take a heavy instrument or saw."
The trial, now in its third month, has heard Christine's father, Robert Jessop, testify he found six of his daughter's bones during an impromptu visit to the isolated rural spot where her body had been found.
Christine had disappeared from the vicinity of her Queensville home, north of Toronto, on Oct. 3, 1984. Her badly decomposed body was found three months later.
Three months after that, Morin, Jessop's next-door neighbor, was charged with her murder.
Credit: CP
1992 The Record - Kitchener-Waterloo. All rights reserved.
The fracture to her skull was below her right eye. This is the first time I've found that particular injury's location clearly specified. Does this not suggest that Christine's killer was left handed?
Dedpanman
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
- Messages
- 496
- Reaction score
- 215
Please note the date of this article. This is previous to the "enhanced" profile mentioned in the other article I posted above.
Massive DNA probe launched: [Final Edition]
Hutchison, Bill
Press the Escape key to close. Kingston Whig - Standard [Kingston, Ont] 21 Mar 1996: 12.
Police have launched a sweeping high-tech search for the rapist- killer of nine-year-old Christine Jessop.
The Jessop Murder Task Force appealed to every police investigator and forensic expert in Ontario for genetic samples taken from suspects in other investigations.
"All our people are looking at it and responding," said Det. Insp. Chris Lewis of the OPP central criminal investigation branch in Orillia. "We will give them everything we have."
Larry Linton, a detective with the Jessop Murder Task Force in Toronto, said he believes that this is the first time that a sweeping genetic search has been undertaken. "I'm not aware of it ever being done anywhere," he said.
Across the province, police are trying to find a suspect with an eerily scientific description. They are looking for blood with DNA that is identified as:
D Q Alpha : 1.2/3
Polymarker results: B, B, AB, B, AC.
This is the specific genetic print from semen found at the Jessop murder scene. Genes are the basic instructions for the human body. Using the latest techniques, the genetic material or DNA in a speck of blood or semen can be analysed and used to identify a murderer or a rapist in the same way that fingerprints are used.
Jessop, who lived north of Toronto, was abducted and killed in 1984. A suspect went through a series of trials, only to be found innocent thanks to newly developed DNA tests. The homicide squad of the Metro Toronto police force formed a new special task force to continue investigation.
In addition to genetic samples, the task force has also asked for reports of any crimes similar to the Jessop killing.
Members of the force keep a picture of the little girl on their office wall. "That's our incentive," said Linton. "We are working our tails off."
Kingston author Sylvia Barrett - who wrote The Arsenic Milkshake and Other Mysteries Solved by Forensic Science - said the key to current DNA identification technology is its ability to clone minute amounts of individual genetic material. This technology did not exist at the time of the original murder trial. The new technique could identify and convict a killer in the Jessop case if police are able to match the original DNA sample from the murder scene with DNA samples from a suspect, she said.
DNA technology proved convincing enough to convict Allan Legere of a series of murders in New Brunswick, she said.
(Copyright The Kingston Whig-Standard 1996)
Massive DNA probe launched: [Final Edition]
Hutchison, Bill
Press the Escape key to close. Kingston Whig - Standard [Kingston, Ont] 21 Mar 1996: 12.
Police have launched a sweeping high-tech search for the rapist- killer of nine-year-old Christine Jessop.
The Jessop Murder Task Force appealed to every police investigator and forensic expert in Ontario for genetic samples taken from suspects in other investigations.
"All our people are looking at it and responding," said Det. Insp. Chris Lewis of the OPP central criminal investigation branch in Orillia. "We will give them everything we have."
Larry Linton, a detective with the Jessop Murder Task Force in Toronto, said he believes that this is the first time that a sweeping genetic search has been undertaken. "I'm not aware of it ever being done anywhere," he said.
Across the province, police are trying to find a suspect with an eerily scientific description. They are looking for blood with DNA that is identified as:
D Q Alpha : 1.2/3
Polymarker results: B, B, AB, B, AC.
This is the specific genetic print from semen found at the Jessop murder scene. Genes are the basic instructions for the human body. Using the latest techniques, the genetic material or DNA in a speck of blood or semen can be analysed and used to identify a murderer or a rapist in the same way that fingerprints are used.
Jessop, who lived north of Toronto, was abducted and killed in 1984. A suspect went through a series of trials, only to be found innocent thanks to newly developed DNA tests. The homicide squad of the Metro Toronto police force formed a new special task force to continue investigation.
In addition to genetic samples, the task force has also asked for reports of any crimes similar to the Jessop killing.
Members of the force keep a picture of the little girl on their office wall. "That's our incentive," said Linton. "We are working our tails off."
Kingston author Sylvia Barrett - who wrote The Arsenic Milkshake and Other Mysteries Solved by Forensic Science - said the key to current DNA identification technology is its ability to clone minute amounts of individual genetic material. This technology did not exist at the time of the original murder trial. The new technique could identify and convict a killer in the Jessop case if police are able to match the original DNA sample from the murder scene with DNA samples from a suspect, she said.
DNA technology proved convincing enough to convict Allan Legere of a series of murders in New Brunswick, she said.
(Copyright The Kingston Whig-Standard 1996)
Hey DPM.
Post #267 - 'Her head had been cut off' per Toronto Star article dated 22 June 1995, page NY01 and NY02 (not 23rd btw for anyone looking for it).
This June 1995 Toronto Star article conflicts with what the Toronto Star reported on 28 January 1992 on page A14.
On 28 Jan 1992 the Star quoted Hillsdon Smith on the stand the week before - 'Hillsdon Smith also told the jusry last week he couldn't explain how he missed cuts to the child's neck, which had partially severed her head.'
Post #267 - 'Her head had been cut off' per Toronto Star article dated 22 June 1995, page NY01 and NY02 (not 23rd btw for anyone looking for it).
This June 1995 Toronto Star article conflicts with what the Toronto Star reported on 28 January 1992 on page A14.
On 28 Jan 1992 the Star quoted Hillsdon Smith on the stand the week before - 'Hillsdon Smith also told the jusry last week he couldn't explain how he missed cuts to the child's neck, which had partially severed her head.'
Also from the same Toronto Star article dated 28 January 1992 - which conflicts with the Kitchener - Waterloo Record of the same day.
'Nor did he (Hillsdon Smith) notice a fracture to her nasal bone which, by itself, could have caused her death.'
These are journalists supposedly quoting witnesses on the stand during a murder trial.
I don't have access to the K-W Record - the nasal fracture is suppose to have radiated outward from the nose into her skull. Is the 'skull fracture under the right eye' the interpretation of the K-W Record writer?
'Nor did he (Hillsdon Smith) notice a fracture to her nasal bone which, by itself, could have caused her death.'
These are journalists supposedly quoting witnesses on the stand during a murder trial.
I don't have access to the K-W Record - the nasal fracture is suppose to have radiated outward from the nose into her skull. Is the 'skull fracture under the right eye' the interpretation of the K-W Record writer?
In the 1995 Toronto Star article, an elderly man that knew the Jessop family made a death bed confession. The article doesn't say whether Tweedy got a blood sample from him or not.
I take it this wasn't JP.
In the same article, it's noted an accused child molester rented an apartment over a store at the time Christine went missing and this person kept a trailer parked at the back of the store. I take it this is 'the store'. No one checked this trailer during the massive searches for CJ? Or it was checked? If it's the same store, this trailer would have been parked across the street from the LE Command Post set up at the time. Or is someone remembering years down the road the Command Post being parked there. The command Post was a trailer.
I take it this wasn't JP.
In the same article, it's noted an accused child molester rented an apartment over a store at the time Christine went missing and this person kept a trailer parked at the back of the store. I take it this is 'the store'. No one checked this trailer during the massive searches for CJ? Or it was checked? If it's the same store, this trailer would have been parked across the street from the LE Command Post set up at the time. Or is someone remembering years down the road the Command Post being parked there. The command Post was a trailer.
If Pamela Newall had material to test in 1998 - she wasn't using a DQ Alpha test. It had been replaced by mid-1997.
So if there is an expert out there, what does 6 new markers mean? According to Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, world renowned for identifying WWI soldiers to nieces and nephews through DNA, markers B, B, AB, B, AC don't mean anything anymore.
So if there is an expert out there, what does 6 new markers mean? According to Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, world renowned for identifying WWI soldiers to nieces and nephews through DNA, markers B, B, AB, B, AC don't mean anything anymore.
So much conflicting information does make it difficult. Guess this all shows why hopes were so high on Ken being able to straighten out some of this. Seeing first hand does cut through the mess.
I believe Ken answered me once before when I asked about the guy who lived at the store who supposedly gave the deathbed confession and Ken said it never happened.
My understanding of the dna (laymans interpretation)
Information from new web sites like the ancestry ones using dna testing are proving quite informative. Some of those sites test for as many as 300 plus markers including the same markers used in the police codis system. The codis markers being used by police were chosen because they have been determined to be those where our main individual genetic differences lay. The rest of the markers are some what more generic per individual population groups. The codis markers as well the earlier markers used by police can all still be tested for as they are subgroups within the human genome.
from- http://www.dna-testing-adviser.com/Indian-DNA-Test.html
Perhaps the earlier markers plus the 6 new ones make up the same criteria and comprise the equivalent of a modern codis test making the results comparable? If there is a dna expert on here who can lay this dna issue to rest that would be great. For now it seems this is another area where the meaning of the information provided is a matter of interpretation.
I believe Ken answered me once before when I asked about the guy who lived at the store who supposedly gave the deathbed confession and Ken said it never happened.
My understanding of the dna (laymans interpretation)
Information from new web sites like the ancestry ones using dna testing are proving quite informative. Some of those sites test for as many as 300 plus markers including the same markers used in the police codis system. The codis markers being used by police were chosen because they have been determined to be those where our main individual genetic differences lay. The rest of the markers are some what more generic per individual population groups. The codis markers as well the earlier markers used by police can all still be tested for as they are subgroups within the human genome.
from- http://www.dna-testing-adviser.com/Indian-DNA-Test.html
Perhaps the earlier markers plus the 6 new ones make up the same criteria and comprise the equivalent of a modern codis test making the results comparable? If there is a dna expert on here who can lay this dna issue to rest that would be great. For now it seems this is another area where the meaning of the information provided is a matter of interpretation.
Did 6 more markers allow the profile to be entered into the DNA Databank? Have always understood the criteria is 13 for absolute identification.
Tweedy didn't announce entry into the databank until 1 Oct 2004, when he was no longer on the case and TPS refuses to confirm that announcement.
Would a manual comparison be required with 6 or 6 more with different markers now used?
Tweedy didn't announce entry into the databank until 1 Oct 2004, when he was no longer on the case and TPS refuses to confirm that announcement.
Would a manual comparison be required with 6 or 6 more with different markers now used?
matou
#los2188
- Joined
- May 11, 2009
- Messages
- 20,149
- Reaction score
- 2,543
I saw the slide of her skull and it was bashed in, nasals, cheekbones, maxillae. It could have occurred from stomping, or hits to the face with a fist or an object. Extreme violence. The breastbone cut was one slice, did not see saw marks from the photo. I think the perp used a knife, a big sharp one. No saw. JMO
In the Toronto Star article from 28 Jan 1992 Hillsdon Smith also says 'the large chunk cut out of her sternum, could have been done with a serrated knife.'
Could this one slice have cut the sternum with everything else still present? What kind of motion would be required to do that?
Could this one slice have cut the sternum with everything else still present? What kind of motion would be required to do that?
The way the law is written now, it requires all 13 of these specific markers but that is just an arbitrary man made rule. True identification could be done in any number of ways using many other combinations of markers. These 13 have proven sufficient to the degree required in most all cases. Less than the 13 can still be used to conclusively rule out a suspect. A match for the remaining twelve available markers would still be highly conclusive, maybe not in the trillion to one range but maybe still in the billion to one range. It no doubt could and would be used.
Dependant upon how the codis system is setup and programmed, it may be as simple as entering an arbitrary value for the unknown 13th marker to be admissable and comparable. I doubt we will be informed any details how the software is programmed but I believe the profile has been entered somehow. I hope and trust that is the case which still leaves the strangest aspect of all, no match has ever surfaced.
That, even given the most horrible of details that suggests this was a true bonified sex sadist who would be unlikely to just stop on his own. The conundrum?
Not sure the value discussing all the details of the body all over again yet but if Ken would re-do the diagram started by dedpanman, perhaps that would suffice for everyone's purposes?
- Status
Similar threads
Online statistics
- Members online
- 116
- Guests online
- 1,705
- Total visitors
- 1,821