Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 *killer identified* #3

[deugirtni]

Excellent point Deugirtni! It works both ways.

(Yes, as long as the system remains honest, and nobody does any switcheroos with evidence. imo.)

Not the same thing, but it seems that things have already been in the works to limit LE's use of genealogical databases. This USA article is from a year ago.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) released new rules yesterday governing when police can use genetic genealogy to track down suspects in serious crimes—the first-ever policy covering how these databases, popular among amateur genealogists, should be used in law enforcement attempts to balance public safety and privacy concerns.


The value of these websites for law enforcement was highlighted last year when Joseph DeAngelo was charged with a series of rapes and murders that had occurred decades earlier. Investigators tracked down the suspect, dubbed the Golden State Killer, by uploading a DNA profile from a crime scene to a public ancestry website, identifying distant relatives, then using traditional genealogy and other information to narrow their search. The approach has led to arrests in at least 60 cold cases around the country.
....
Under the new policy, police can’t quietly upload a fake profile to a genealogy website, as some have done in hopes of finding a suspect’s distant relatives, without first identifying themselves. And the site itself must have informed its users that law enforcement agencies may search their data.


The policy also bars police from using a suspect’s DNA profile to look for genes related to disease risks or psychological traits. Another provision attempts to limit situations in which police secretly take a DNA sample from a suspect’s relative—from a discarded cup or tissue, for example—to help home in on a suspect. The policy says the person must give their informed consent unless police have obtained a search warrant.
....
The growing use of genetic genealogy searches—McGuire says she’s heard of 300 active cases using the approach—hit a roadblock in May when GEDmatch, a free database used in most of the cases cracked so far, revised its policy to allow such searches only for customers who had agreed to be included. That “opt in” policy has reduced by 90%, from 1.4 million to 140,000, the number of profiles police can search, according to a recent news report, making it much less useful.
....
New federal rules limit police searches of family tree DNA databases

 

[photographer4]

CH was only 28 and HH was 27 at the time of Christine’s murder, so I wonder if their other sons were born in later years? With 4 kids, it certainly shows they must have had an active life! One other thing that stood out to me. The second wife considered CH her “soul mate”. Hard to imagine that.

"Loving wife and soul mate of Cal Hoover of Waterdown.”

Uh just to point out, the deceased may not have written her own obit. SOmeone else may have written it, and she may never have known what it said. That has happened in a lot of cases so it doesn't mean its true. If CH wrote her obit, he could have it say whatever he wanted it to say.

 

[Forest_Wood]

Uh just to point out, the deceased may not have written her own obit. SOmeone else may have written it, and she may never have known what it said. That has happened in a lot of cases so it doesn't mean its true. If CH wrote her obit, he could have it say whatever he wanted it to say.

I have a hard time imagining he had a soulmate, regardless of who wrote it.

 

[Tadpole12]

If the Jessop family held secrets, it was that CJ didn’t tell her parents about the sexual abuse at the time, nor did Ken. I’m in no way blaming him considering his age at the time but unfortunately it doesn’t change the fact it did happen.

The following is a hypothetical scenario - if the initial SA of a considerable duration over time had been known, how it could’ve changed the course of events. For example - studies have shown the children who suffer SA and don’t speak out for whatever reason are often abused by more than one culprit. Why is that? I’d assume it’s because they don’t totally understand how wrong it is, even if/when the initial abuse ceases.

But what if she confided her secret to a family friend she trusted instead of her parents so as not to get Ken in trouble - an adult such as CH? What if he crossed over the wrong side of morals and ethics and instead took advantage of her disclosure and the abuse then continued under the guise of it was indeed “normal”? What if CH hurt her, then suddenly he became frightened she would tell and so he murdered her to protect himself, while continuing to play the role of an loyal and helpful family friend?

If so, at the onset of the murdered investigation had there were any indications CH was extraordinary kind and nice toward the child, he might’ve fallen within LEs suspect list instead of a weird neighbour. That’s what I mean by family secrets and how it might’ve made a difference if LE knew everything there was to know at the onset of the murder investigation, if not before.

But unfortunately the clock cannot be wound back to 1984 or earlier but it’s just an example of how past events can lead toward future situations, a chain of actions or non-actions. I really have to doubt it’s a total coincidence an earlier sexually abused child is then murdered at the young age of 9 during a violent sexual attack. Ultimately it’s disturbing to me how it appears she had no one to protect her during her short life

With CH having frequent access to CJ we don't know if the kidnapping was preplanned. (If) He knew that JJ and her family were without BJ for a couple weeks before CJ disappeared.
One of the profiles mentions B&E and peeping as behaviour patterns of possible suspects.

CH killed CJ at one of the lowest points in her life, when her father was gone. All that she had gone through with her health issues, this was a child to be protected, but she was betrayed.

 

[othram]

I’m not sure if DNA was taken from GPM under false pretences but it was analysis of the stains that proved his innocence.

“Several previous attempts to perform DNA testing on the semen stains found on Christine’s underpants had been unsuccessful, but the technology had now advanced enough that a more sophisticated test could be conducted. This test proved that the DNA in question could not belong to Guy....”
Guy Paul Morin - Innocence Canada

It was another couple decades before we had the technology to build a full genomewide profile and in that time, the DNA had of course degraded further!

 

[Deleted member 275109]

I would like to propose a Covid era challenge to everyone...
I used to occasionally browse through this website. I did not join or comment until Christine's case was solved. I figured these cold cases were in the hands of brilliant, experienced people, LE, crime experts. Who was I to speculate when experts couldn't figure it out? Now that I know that Christine's mother told LE that the Hoover monster had access to her home and they didn't question him, it makes me believe that people should not have blind faith in these "experts".
It's not my intention to criticize LE. They are only human and we all make mistakes. One of my family members worked for the OPP. I am told that in the "olden days" , one could be hired on to a police force with only a high school diploma. They learned their trade through a quick "training" and then mainly on the job. Your level of expertise depended on the competence of your colleagues and the size of your police force. If there were more crimes, you learned more. The people working on Christine's case were obviously not as competent as police officers today. And then there's office politics. You have to listen to your boss. Who knows if someone suggested "hey let's interview Calvin" and their boss said "no, he's ok, he helped with the search, leave him alone".
The people who frequent this site come from a variety of backgrounds and have a variety of skill sets, expertise and knowledge. Christine's case has been solved, but there are many others waiting for someone to notice a simple irregularity, or to catch a terrible oversight like the one in Christine's case that could have solved her murder year's ago. During this pandemic, when we are being encouraged to stay at home, when you find yourself bored or with a bit of extra time on your hands, find an unsolved case to read about. Read about Noreen Greenley who has never been found. Read about Sonia Varaschin who was found, but her killer wasn't. Pick a case that catches your eye. Go with your gut instinct and post your theory or your questions, no matter how unlikely they may sound. You are all experts at something. You may notice something that everyone missed. Let's put our "lockdown" time to good use. Wouldn't it be nice if one or two of these cases got solved? Maybe 2020 can redeem itself.

 

[Vern]

I agree. There’s still no obituary. Like, I get this is a non-American case, but still.

In my family here in Canada, it's probably 50/50 whether or not an Obituary is published. Weird I know, but not weird for us. My dad wanted one so he dictated it while I wrote it out for him.

 

[MistyWaters]

It was another couple decades before we had the technology to build a full genomewide profile and in that time, the DNA had of course degraded further!

Yes, initially the underwear was probably just retained as crime scene evidence proving the SA occurred. Nobody could’ve predicted technological advancements in future years would lead toward the stains either exonerating or identifying the killer.

It was only that same year, in 1984, when it was first discovered DNA could determine parentage.

BBM

“Thanks to the research by Jeffreys, thousands of dangerous criminals have been caught and imprisoned and thousands of individuals unfairly denied UK citizenship have been allowed to settle in this country. At the same time, millions of individuals have had their profiles stored in databases in Britain, a serious threat to civil liberties according to some organisations and individuals, a point that is - partially - accepted by Jeffreys himself. More than any other modern scientific discovery, DNA fingerprinting raises crucial issues about balancing the use of technology to help society against an individual's right to privacy.

Such concerns were far from the mind of Alec Jeffreys, then a 34-year-old Leicester University genetics researcher, in the summer of 1984. At the time he was seeking ways to trace genes through family lineages and had hit on a fragment of DNA that was repeated on different chromosomes in the cells of men and women....”
Eureka moment that led to the discovery of DNA fingerprinting

 

[MistyWaters]

In my family here in Canada, it's probably 50/50 whether or not an Obituary is published. Weird I know, but not weird for us. My dad wanted one so he dictated it while I wrote it out for him.

I agree, fewer and fewer families have obituaries published. It’s up to them if they want the funeral home to release an obituary, it’s not an automatic thing. One of the reasons for not doing so is privacy from solicitation from investment companies and so forth. Another is crime prevention as vacant residences of deceased individuals getting broken into is known to happen as a result of thieves scanning obituaries. Another is if for whatever reason the family chooses not to hold a public celebration of life, funeral or memorial service there’s really no need to announce a death as friends of the deceased can be notified in more personal ways.

 

[othram]

I would like to propose a Covid era challenge to everyone...
I used to occasionally browse through this website. I did not join or comment until Christine's case was solved. I figured these cold cases were in the hands of brilliant, experienced people, LE, crime experts. Who was I to speculate when experts couldn't figure it out? Now that I know that Christine's mother told LE that the Hoover monster had access to her home and they didn't question him, it makes me believe that people should not have blind faith in these "experts".
It's not my intention to criticize LE. They are only human and we all make mistakes. One of my family members worked for the OPP. I am told that in the "olden days" , one could be hired on to a police force with only a high school diploma. They learned their trade through a quick "training" and then mainly on the job. Your level of expertise depended on the competence of your colleagues and the size of your police force. If there were more crimes, you learned more. The people working on Christine's case were obviously not as competent as police officers today. And then there's office politics. You have to listen to your boss. Who knows if someone suggested "hey let's interview Calvin" and their boss said "no, he's ok, he helped with the search, leave him alone".
The people who frequent this site come from a variety of backgrounds and have a variety of skill sets, expertise and knowledge. Christine's case has been solved, but there are many others waiting for someone to notice a simple irregularity, or to catch a terrible oversight like the one in Christine's case that could have solved her murder year's ago. During this pandemic, when we are being encouraged to stay at home, when you find yourself bored or with a bit of extra time on your hands, find an unsolved case to read about. Read about Noreen Greenley who has never been found. Read about Sonia Varaschin who was found, but her killer wasn't. Pick a case that catches your eye. Go with your gut instinct and post your theory or your questions, no matter how unlikely they may sound. You are all experts at something. You may notice something that everyone missed. Let's put our "lockdown" time to good use. Wouldn't it be nice if one or two of these cases got solved? Maybe 2020 can redeem itself.

Great idea. Takes a "village" to solve these older cases and Websleuths is a great village.

 

[casesensitive]

I would like to propose a Covid era challenge to everyone...
I used to occasionally browse through this website. I did not join or comment until Christine's case was solved. I figured these cold cases were in the hands of brilliant, experienced people, LE, crime experts. Who was I to speculate when experts couldn't figure it out? Now that I know that Christine's mother told LE that the Hoover monster had access to her home and they didn't question him, it makes me believe that people should not have blind faith in these "experts".
It's not my intention to criticize LE. They are only human and we all make mistakes. One of my family members worked for the OPP. I am told that in the "olden days" , one could be hired on to a police force with only a high school diploma. They learned their trade through a quick "training" and then mainly on the job. Your level of expertise depended on the competence of your colleagues and the size of your police force. If there were more crimes, you learned more. The people working on Christine's case were obviously not as competent as police officers today. And then there's office politics. You have to listen to your boss. Who knows if someone suggested "hey let's interview Calvin" and their boss said "no, he's ok, he helped with the search, leave him alone".
The people who frequent this site come from a variety of backgrounds and have a variety of skill sets, expertise and knowledge. Christine's case has been solved, but there are many others waiting for someone to notice a simple irregularity, or to catch a terrible oversight like the one in Christine's case that could have solved her murder year's ago. During this pandemic, when we are being encouraged to stay at home, when you find yourself bored or with a bit of extra time on your hands, find an unsolved case to read about. Read about Noreen Greenley who has never been found. Read about Sonia Varaschin who was found, but her killer wasn't. Pick a case that catches your eye. Go with your gut instinct and post your theory or your questions, no matter how unlikely they may sound. You are all experts at something. You may notice something that everyone missed. Let's put our "lockdown" time to good use. Wouldn't it be nice if one or two of these cases got solved? Maybe 2020 can redeem itself.

You have made very valid points about the lack of police capability in handling many historical homicide cases. Many police forces did not have personnel who were trained to properly investigate homicide cases (nor the knowledge to properly store crime scene evidence). Office politics was an issue, as was the lack of sharing information with other police forces due to macho competition, and later due to a lack of a manageable communication system which took years to fine tune.

When the London, Ontario serial killer(s) cases exploded starting in 1969, there wasn't one London police investigator who had experience with homicides. Many of the missing victims' bodies were found outside of the city limits, which transferred the cases to the OPP (Ontario Provincial Police).

The OPP investigator, Dennis Alsop was inundated with homicide after homicide of children and young people for next the several years. He ran into office politics because the top brass wanted to down-play that there was a serial killer in their midst.

Skip ahead fourteen years to 1984, where Durham Regional Police took over Christine's case from York Regional Police the day after her body was found three months after she went missing. Six weeks later, they heard Mrs. Jessop say that GPM was a "weird-type guy", and just two months later they arrested him for her murder. I can see where police investigators lacked training back then, and how tunnel vision was a pit fall that wasn't taught, but there is no excuse for the crown prosecutors who took this case to trial, and then prosecuted it again.

I feel your enthusiasm for WS members to visit other cases. I have spent many hours on Noreen Greenley and Sonia Varaschin's thread in Unsolved Canada threads. My experience, and other WS members, has shown that when LE remain silent, we can only rely on media coverage for bits of information. LE in Canada stopped sharing any information many years ago, and our only source of information is from mass media. Everything we discuss is speculation. Without LE files we would never be able to find an oversight in their investigation as happened in CJ's case.

But having said that, I welcome your participation on WS. I wouldn't be here if I didn't think that we couldn't make a difference with our collective abilities. It has happened before, and it will happen again.

 

[Forest_Wood]

In thinking about CH’s DUI conviction, would losing your licence for a year have been for a first time conviction back then? It seems a one year suspension would have been for a second or even third offense.

 

[Power of Two]

I agree, fewer and fewer families have obituaries published. It’s up to them if they want the funeral home to release an obituary, it’s not an automatic thing. One of the reasons for not doing so is privacy from solicitation from investment companies and so forth. Another is crime prevention as vacant residences of deceased individuals getting broken into is known to happen as a result of thieves scanning obituaries. Another is if for whatever reason the family chooses not to hold a public celebration of life, funeral or memorial service there’s really no need to announce a death as friends of the deceased can be notified in more personal ways.

In my experience, publishing an obituary is an added cost to an already necessary and costly service. In my region, most funeral homes print a simple notice of death on their website. Of course, we haven't had the internet for all those many years. If the family wishes to have an obituary printed in the newspaper, each word costs money and a picture even more. So.. finances may play a part as to whether or not an obituary is printed, then and now.

 

[Tadpole12]

In thinking about CH’s DUI conviction, would losing your licence for a year have been for a first time conviction back then? It seems a one year suspension would have been for a second or even third offense.

Impaired driving in Canada - Wikipedia

Sentencing,
"The minimum sentences are;
For a first offence, a $1000 fine and a 12-month driving prohibition "

F_W
I'm not sure about the penalties in the 1990's

 

[Vern]

Impaired driving in Canada - Wikipedia

Sentencing,
"The minimum sentences are;
For a first offence, a $1000 fine and a 12-month driving prohibition "

F_W
I'm not sure about the penalties in the 1990's

Current Penalties can be found below:
O'Connor MacLeod Hanna LLP | Burlington, Oakville, Milton, Halton Lawyers

In November 1996, Bill 85 - Ontario, was passed which introduced license suspensions for Impaired Driving convictions (after years of serious, and deserved, lobbying by MADD Canada and Ontario seeing statistics that saw 41.3% of their 1995 traffic fatalities being alcohol related!! Source: ( Understanding drinking and driving reforms: a profile of Ontario statistics )!!! Just wow.
Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Impaired Driving), 1996

Prior to that Bill, prohibition was not ingrained in law. Nor was there a "mandatory" requirement to undergo a breathalyser test - one had the right to refuse. IIRC, he had been charged with Impaired Driving in 1995 (statement that he had been arrested in 1995), but convicted in 1996. He would have had to be arrested, charged and convicted (all three) between End-Nov and end-Dec 1996 - a mere 6 week period - (since we know the law start date of end-November 96 and the fact he was convicted in 96) to have been subject to a suspension from driving. The odds of that are Zero to Nil with the pace of our system even back then.

He have been subject to the law in place at the time he committed the offense - thus no suspension - simply a fine and be on his merry way.

 

[Forest_Wood]

The only info I could find about DUIs in the ‘90s is https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/85-002-x/85-002-x1997012-eng.pdf?st=QO_P8clK where CH would have been included in these stats. I imagine he had problematic drinking issues long before getting charged with drinking and driving.

 

[Forest_Wood]

Reading the previous threads, some of the earlier posters put so much thought and effort into developing and presenting their theories. It was quite remarkable to read through them and they did such a great job with the evidence they had at the time.

Some thoughts I have had since reading those (and moo) is that CH may have arrived just when Christine was leaving on her bike to go to the store. I think she could have had her recorder in a front pocket of her sweatshirt if she had that type of sweatshirt on — the kind that has the full width pocket across the front of the stomach.

He pulled up in his vehicle and asked where she was going and he offered to give her a ride to the store. “Hop in my car, I’ll drive you there.”

He may have initially hoped to spend only a brief amount of time with her to assault her, like I believe he may have done on occasion during visits. It was reported the family had just been at their home two days previously. I don’t believe he had a solid plan other than to sexually assault her. He wanted to take the contact to the next level.

He needed to get her away from the house and into his car quickly. He may have offered to pay for her candy or asked her to get something for him while she was in the store. She got in his car and he drove her to the store. This would explain why nobody witnessed her going to or returning from the store and why she didn’t take her bike.

The owner of the store was adamant she was there that day. Hoover dropped her off at the corner and drove around the block or he made a maneouver to position his car in front of the store to pick her up again when she came out.

The witness Robert Atkinson saw her outside the store looking like she could have been waiting for someone. He saw a “bag of candy” in her hand and her recorder.

When Hoover repositioned his vehicle, he was now facing eastbound on Queensville S.R. He picked her up in front of the store again and he was desperately trying to come up with the next part of his plan to get in in private.

Once she was in the car again, he may have said something to her to indicate he wanted her to do something with him, such as, “Let’s go park the car and have some fun”. Or maybe he took her hand and placed it on him.

She resisted and said she wanted to go home, take me home! He told he he’d take her home, so he turned left back onto Leslie St to make her think he was taking her home and to calm her down.

At the same time, she suddenly realized the danger she was in and began struggling so CH began pushing her down to control her at the busy intersection. I think the injury to her face may have happened at this time.

The Horwoods in the other car observed this struggle. It stood out to both of them that something was suspicious going on in that car. They followed the car and lost sight of it after it turned into a left side street in a residential section. It’s possible that the couple had to wait a minute or more before being able to turn left while oncoming traffic went by on the busy Leslie Street. This pause may have given the driver of the other car enough time to drive around that circle and exit again before they got a chance to catch up.

I think the sighting by that couple was a very important eye-witness account in this case that was not followed up adequately.

 

[Deleted member 275109]

I’m sorry if it was already mentioned, but how old were the Horwoods? Are they still alive? Did they see the picture of CH? I wonder if they said “that’s him”.

 

[MsBetsy]

Reading the previous threads, some of the earlier posters put so much thought and effort into developing and presenting their theories. It was quite remarkable to read through them and they did such a great job with the evidence they had at the time.

Some thoughts I have had since reading those (and moo) is that CH may have arrived just when Christine was leaving on her bike to go to the store. I think she could have had her recorder in a front pocket of her sweatshirt if she had that type of sweatshirt on — the kind that has the full width pocket across the front of the stomach.

He pulled up in his vehicle and asked where she was going and he offered to give her a ride to the store. “Hop in my car, I’ll drive you there.”

He may have initially hoped to spend only a brief amount of time with her to assault her, like I believe he may have done on occasion during visits. It was reported the family had just been at their home two days previously. I don’t believe he had a solid plan other than to sexually assault her. He wanted to take the contact to the next level.

He needed to get her away from the house and into his car quickly. He may have offered to pay for her candy or asked her to get something for him while she was in the store. She got in his car and he drove her to the store. This would explain why nobody witnessed her going to or returning from the store and why she didn’t take her bike.

The owner of the store was adamant she was there that day. Hoover dropped her off at the corner and drove around the block or he made a maneouver to position his car in front of the store to pick her up again when she came out.

The witness Robert Atkinson saw her outside the store looking like she could have been waiting for someone. He saw a “bag of candy” in her hand and her recorder.

When Hoover repositioned his vehicle, he was now facing eastbound on Queensville S.R. He picked her up in front of the store again and he was desperately trying to come up with the next part of his plan to get in in private.

Once she was in the car again, he may have said something to her to indicate he wanted her to do something with him, such as, “Let’s go park the car and have some fun”. Or maybe he took her hand and placed it on him.

She resisted and said she wanted to go home, take me home! He told he he’d take her home, so he turned left back onto Leslie St to make her think he was taking her home and to calm her down.

At the same time, she suddenly realized the danger she was in and began struggling so CH began pushing her down to control her at the busy intersection. I think the injury to her face may have happened at this time.

The Horwoods in the other car observed this struggle. It stood out to both of them that something was suspicious going on in that car. They followed the car and lost sight of it after it turned into a left side street in a residential section. It’s possible that the couple had to wait a minute or more before being able to turn left while oncoming traffic went by on the busy Leslie Street. This pause may have given the driver of the other car enough time to drive around that circle and exit again before they got a chance to catch up.

I think the sighting by that couple was a very important eye-witness account in this case that was not followed up adequately.

We must think alike because I have considered the exact same scenario, right down to him offering to buy the candy and circling around in his car to pick her up.

There was also a report of a car parked near their house around the time she disappeared. I think it was described as dark blue or green. I think he offered her a ride and in her rush she left the bike where it was found instead of using the kickstand. She had her recorder with her since she was excited to show it off. He also may have told her he would bring her to the jail to see her father, like her brother had always thought.

And yes, the older threads are very interesting and informative. There were some posters who put a lot of time and effort into the discussion.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Editor Opinion:
On Oct. 15, police announced that through innovative DNA testing they finally found the truth: Christine was killed by family acquaintance and neighbour Calvin Hoover, who died by suicide in 2015. The news brought some peace to the Jessop family.

It’s important not to forget old murder and missing persons cases, even though it’s painful. And that’s why we regularly write about them. We must remind people of injustices that have not yet been righted, and by keeping these stories in the public eye, fresh tips are sometimes generated for investigators. In a way, these stories sometimes contribute to justice being done.

The Jessop case gives hope to families of murder victims and missing persons who are still seeking answers. There’s renewed hope that despite the long passage of time, old cases can still be solved. Cases such as the July 30, 1985, disappearance of eight-year-old Etobicoke girl Nicole Morin (no relation to Guy Paul Morin), which I wrote about last year.

Acting Det. Sgt. Steve Smith, the officer in charge of the cold case section of the homicide squad, says a homicide case is like putting together a giant puzzle where every piece is vital to the successful outcome.

“With cold cases, we revisit these puzzles to determine where the missing pieces are and what steps we can take as investigators to fill in those gaps in order to bring justice to the family, friends and communities left behind,” he said in an email.

“Often, it’s the community that holds some of these missing pieces and when stories are written, no matter how historic the case may be, you never know when it might spark a memory or be that final push someone needed to come forward with that last piece of the puzzle.”
Opinion | Cold case stories 'contribute to justice being done'