GUILTY Canada - Diane Werendowicz, 23, raped & murdered, Hamilton, Ont, June 1981

[deugirtni]

<snipped>
As to address, this was a post from when EK was on the stand and blurted out RB lived at 50...I think only today did someone contradicted that although depends on how you took what he said. IMO I'm not sure that's been truly clarified enough.
....
but I thought he also said something about sitting the bar parking lot looking for women.

Another way you could look at this is some of these points don't exclude RB either.

It was finally stated yesterday as to when exactly RB lived on Jerome Cres. TH's younger brother testified they had moved there after RB and TH got married (I believe they married in April 1982). And BM moved out of that apartment building 'by' 1982. So at the time of DW's murder, RB wasn't living there, and I don't believe we've been told exactly where he was living at the time.

Oct 31, 2016 Tweets by Lisa Hepfner &#8207;@HefCHCHNews:

-Miller moved into an apartment building in about 1980 with his father when his parents broke up. 70 Jerome Cresc. Same as #Werendowicz

-By 1982 Miller had moved out of the Jerome Cresc apt. He went to live with Tim Bradshaw on Oxford Street. #Badgerow

-#Badgerow moved to Jerome Crescent after he and Tammy Hunt got married, Hunt says he's sure he visited but doesn't remember

-#Badgerow dated his sister & got married in 1982 with no breakups, as far as her brother Robert Hunt recalls

RB hasn't testified at this trial yet, so hopefully we'll hear from him.

 

[deugirtni]

Interesting how both CV and BM gave RB's lawyer attitude while testifying on the stand. They don't appreciate knowing they were alternate suspects. It's unlikely they would ever be charged at this late date even if RB were to be acquitted. So why give attitude? Why not just be relieved they were never charged and just testify like normal people?

 

[dotr]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...-it-matter-how-much-the-murder-victim-drank-/
CLAIRMONT: Does it matter how much the murder victim drank?

KITCHENER &#8212; Discussing how drunk Diane Werendowicz was when she was murdered is an uncomfortable thing.

It is as though there is an insinuation that the beers she drank that night somehow caused her death.
The connection, in fact, is more nuanced than that. But still uneasy.
Was Diane drunk enough to have anonymous, unprotected sex with a stranger in his car? And was she sober enough to properly consent? And if that stranger was Robert Badgerow, does it give a jury enough reasonable doubt to find him not guilty of Diane's rape and first degree murder?
As forensic toxicologist Dr. Daryl Mayers was called as a defence witness Tuesday at Badgerow's trial, he brought with him to the stand a whole lot of science about Diane's blood alcohol level. But lurking all around him were society's myths and beliefs about women, alcohol and sexual assault.

The implication there being that Diane may have left the bar around midnight, but she was alive until 3.
Here's what was not said, by anybody in the courtroom. Yet it stomped around like the elephant it is.
Was sober Diane the type of girl to have spontaneous sex with a random guy in the parking lot? Would drunk Diane do it?
Had she consumed enough beer to do what Badgerow says they did?
Because if that happened, then maybe the rest of his story fits, too. That she was very much alive when they parted ways and someone else attacked and killed her on the way home.
And that both Diane and Badgerow got very unlucky that night.

 

[Claroon]

It was finally stated yesterday as to when exactly RB lived on Jerome Cres. TH's younger brother testified they had moved there after RB and TH got married (I believe they married in April 1982). And BM moved out of that apartment building 'by' 1982. So at the time of DW's murder, RB wasn't living there, and I don't believe we've been told exactly where he was living at the time.

Oct 31, 2016 Tweets by Lisa Hepfner &#8207;@HefCHCHNews:

-Miller moved into an apartment building in about 1980 with his father when his parents broke up. 70 Jerome Cresc. Same as #Werendowicz

-By 1982 Miller had moved out of the Jerome Cresc apt. He went to live with Tim Bradshaw on Oxford Street. #Badgerow

-#Badgerow moved to Jerome Crescent after he and Tammy Hunt got married, Hunt says he's sure he visited but doesn't remember

-#Badgerow dated his sister & got married in 1982 with no breakups, as far as her brother Robert Hunt recalls

RB hasn't testified at this trial yet, so hopefully we'll hear from him.

Even today's witness LLM is making the address and timing very confusing. Geesh, after all these years you'd think she'd get her dates down.

My question is, though he may not be living there was he in fact in DW's building paying visits to this LLM? Months of 1981 are needed.

Susan Clairmont &#8207;@susanclairmont 43m43 minutes ago
Badgerow came to her home when she lived in apartment 603, then later when she lived in a different apartment there.

Now cross. First lived at Jerome Cresent from 1975-81. Lived on 6th floor, Diane was on 9th floor. She did not know her.

They dated 1979 or 80.

She graduated high school in 1977...Likely dated him in summer of 1978, she confirms.

What the heck does this mean if she had moved out of Jerome? Or was she referring to first Jerome apt until '81 and then moved to a different apt?

When he visited her later at Jerome, it was a year after he got married. "We just caught up."

Badgerow came to her home when she lived in apartment 603, then later when she lived in a different apartment there.
No contact with him until after he got married in April 1982.

Why doesn't someone come out and say if he was living there June 19, 1981 or not and if not, was he visiting people in that builidng around June 1981?

 

[Claroon]

Interesting how both CV and BM gave RB's lawyer attitude while testifying on the stand. They don't appreciate knowing they were alternate suspects. It's unlikely they would ever be charged at this late date even if RB were to be acquitted. So why give attitude? Why not just be relieved they were never charged and just testify like normal people?

I'd say because they want to move on with their lives and not risk their reputation.

 

[Claroon]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...-it-matter-how-much-the-murder-victim-drank-/
CLAIRMONT: Does it matter how much the murder victim drank?

Thank you SC for spinning a new viewpoint. Yes, the conversation about how much she drank versus how much had left her body gives a clearer window of time of death IMO. Which is later than first predicted.

One thing for sure is there is no "evidence" of rape as there were no vaginal contusions. I know they said there need not be, but it's really hard to say in this case. IMO

I just want to add, though, RB may have had more beer in the car, or if there were carousers in the field, there may have been beer there too offered to her. (speculation)

 

[Claroon]

Wishing I could see deugirtni's face when she read this:

He wore cowboy boots or motorcycle boots, jeans, T-shirt with a shirt over that. Dark hair.

SC Tweet.

We know who road a motorcycle. Also, we don't know where the bar was that CV worked at? Could it have been in the area?

 

[deugirtni]

Wishing I could see deugirtni's face when she read this:

SC Tweet.

We know who road a motorcycle. Also, we don't know where the bar was that CV worked at? Could it have been in the area?

I haven't been able to read today's tweets yet.. now dying to see what's there that you could want to see my face.. now i'm scared to read it!

 

[Claroon]

I haven't been able to read today's tweets yet.. now dying to see what's there that you could want to see my face.. now i'm scared to read it!

Just very intriguing information about a male arguing and wearing boots of some sort. Geesh, wish the lawyers had asked each dude if he ever wore cowboy boots or motorcycle boots.

 

[dotr]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...defence-livid-over-crown-s-burst-of-laughter/
Clairmont: Badgerow defence livid over Crown’s burst of laughter

The great passage of time since the murder means many witnesses have died or are too unwell to testify now. As a result, their testimony from previous trials is read into the record, with lawyers role-playing the parts. This jury has heard at least a dozen of such read-ins since the trial began eight weeks ago.
So Crown Cheryl Gzik was playing the role of herself (she has prosecuted Badgerow twice before) and Fox was reading the part of Beth Groves, who once dated Brian Miller, the convicted serial rapist whom Badgerow's defence team has put forward as Diane's real killer.
Groves was not pleased to be called as a witness. Her hostility to Gzik was obvious. Gzik and Fox had to re-enact the combative cross-examination.
Let me pause here for a moment to tell you about Fox.
I have known him for some time and have covered other murder trials he has prosecuted. He is dedicated and caring. He is, also, very formal. I've never heard him crack a joke in the courtroom. I have never heard him say anything remotely disrespectful. He's all business in front of the jury.
But then … he lost it. He inexplicably, inappropriately lost it.
The words in the transcript aren't funny. It is a back and forth over when Groves lost contact with Miller. A bunch of dates were bandied about and at one point Fox had to read in Groves' words: "No, no, no, no. No, no, no …"
For some reason, that set him off. He laughed. Some of the jury reacted to the odd moment with their own laughter.
And then a few lines later, still over the issue of dates, Fox laughed again. Like he just couldn't control it now.
Groves' evidence is critical to the defence. She said the voice of an anonymous 911 caller who phoned police with intimate details of Diane's murder was that of Miller. If the jury believes that, it could exonerate Badgerow.
But Fox's laughter seriously compromised that evidence. And defence lawyers Russell Silverstein and Ingrid Grant were — justifiably — livid

 

[Claroon]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...defence-livid-over-crown-s-burst-of-laughter/
Clairmont: Badgerow defence livid over Crown&#8217;s burst of laughter

Thanks, I wasn't able to read it since they want me to buy a subscription to see it.

 

[Typhoo1961]

Thanks, I wasn't able to read it since they want me to buy a subscription to see it.

KITCHENER — Decorum in the courtroom is sacrosanct.
You stand when the judge enters. You take off your hat, turn off your phone. You don't chat or chew gum or place your sunglasses atop of your head.
Lawyers refer to each other as "my friend" even when they aren't. Most everybody is a Mr. or Ms. unless they are Your Honour.
Great care is typically taken to show respect for victims of crime, their families and — this may come as a surprise — the accused. Particularly at a murder trial. The weight and solemnity of the proceeding is usually palpable the moment you step into the courtroom.
So to have an assistant Crown attorney burst into laughter in the midst of a defence witness's testimony is a bad thing.
Indeed, for Crown Michael Fox, it was likely one of the most mortifying moments of his career.
And it happened twice.
This bizarre scene unfolded late Tuesday afternoon at Robert Badgerow's murder trial.
Badgerow is the first person in Canada to be tried four times for the same first degree murder charge. He is accused of raping, strangling and drowning Diane Werendowicz in Stoney Creek 35 years ago.
He was convicted at his first trial but that verdict was overturned on appeal. His second trial ended in a hung jury when there was no unanimous verdict. The same thing happened at his third trial.
The great passage of time since the murder means many witnesses have died or are too unwell to testify now. As a result, their testimony from previous trials is read into the record, with lawyers role-playing the parts. This jury has heard at least a dozen of such read-ins since the trial began eight weeks ago.
So Crown Cheryl Gzik was playing the role of herself (she has prosecuted Badgerow twice before) and Fox was reading the part of Beth Groves, who once dated Brian Miller, the convicted serial rapist whom Badgerow's defence team has put forward as Diane's real killer.
Groves was not pleased to be called as a witness. Her hostility to Gzik was obvious. Gzik and Fox had to re-enact the combative cross-examination.
Let me pause here for a moment to tell you about Fox.
I have known him for some time and have covered other murder trials he has prosecuted. He is dedicated and caring. He is, also, very formal. I've never heard him crack a joke in the courtroom. I have never heard him say anything remotely disrespectful. He's all business in front of the jury.
But then … he lost it. He inexplicably, inappropriately lost it.
The words in the transcript aren't funny. It is a back and forth over when Groves lost contact with Miller. A bunch of dates were bandied about and at one point Fox had to read in Groves' words: "No, no, no, no. No, no, no …"
For some reason, that set him off. He laughed. Some of the jury reacted to the odd moment with their own laughter.
And then a few lines later, still over the issue of dates, Fox laughed again. Like he just couldn't control it now.
Groves' evidence is critical to the defence. She said the voice of an anonymous 911 caller who phoned police with intimate details of Diane's murder was that of Miller. If the jury believes that, it could exonerate Badgerow.
But Fox's laughter seriously compromised that evidence. And defence lawyers Russell Silverstein and Ingrid Grant were — justifiably — livid.
Over to Wednesday morning now.
The jurors are brought into the courtroom and Fox immediately stands. He profusely apologizes. No excuses.
"I want to express my sincere apologies … for my loss of composure yesterday," he said. "It's the words of the witness that are important and I ask you to ignore the manner in which they were read in."
To drive the point home, Justice Patrick Flynn dressed Fox down a little more, saying his behaviour was "extremely inappropriate" and "disrespectful" and "there is nothing funny about the evidence of Ms. Groves."
All of that is true, of course.
But I have confidence the jury can separate that weird transgression from the duty they have to decide the facts of a first-degree murder case.
[h=2]Phone booth evidence[/h]A recording of the anonymous 911 call in the Diane Werendowicz case, followed by police attempts to trace the call.

[video=youtube;9LIQyC2YT4w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LIQyC2YT4w[/video]

 

[Claroon]

Here are samples of the 911 call

http://www.chch.com/911-call-robert-badgerow-trial/

Bradshaw interview http://www.chch.com/badgerow-trial-october-20th/

 

[Claroon]

[video=youtube;9LIQyC2YT4w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LIQyC2YT4w[/video][/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

He was so sweet in that wedding video.

 

[dotr]

Not sure why, but i found that wedding video depressing, noting the somewhat clipped speech pattern of RB, like he was reading notes in class, or on the phone.. imo, speculation.

 

[Claroon]

Not sure why, but i found that wedding video depressing, noting the somewhat clipped speech pattern of RB, like he was reading notes in class, or on the phone.. imo, speculation.

In the end he pointed out that he is shy. I think that and inexperience had to do with the choppy speech. IMO

The depressing thing is we know he cheated on her.

Also, noted the blondish groomsman in the background.

 

[deugirtni]

Just very intriguing information about a male arguing and wearing boots of some sort. Geesh, wish the lawyers had asked each dude if he ever wore cowboy boots or motorcycle boots.

I am feeling really appalled at the seeming lack of investigation into the details of potential evidence in DW's murder case. This witness spoke to police way back when it happened, but yet she wasn't 'properly interviewed' until 2001??? It's not like the police even had another suspect in mind and were refusing to consider alternates. The case went cold, and yet they seemed to have at least a few clues that *we* know of that seem like they should have been followed up on much better. It's hard to imagine. Sure glad it isn't someone that *I* love who stands accused of this murder and perhaps wouldn't be there if not for such seemingly bad followup. ie this woman's testimony (Perhaps we're not hearing all of the testimony due to the tweeting??), was the woman able to say that the woman in the street *could* have been the same woman in DW's photograph? Could she hear anything they were saying? (It was summertime, so the window likely would've been open). If so, what were they fighting about? Were they noticed by any other neighbours at the time? What was CV's hairstyle like at that time? And why was there not an appeal from RB's defence team when they were told they weren't allowed to mention CV's semen being found in her panties that night?

"She was canvassed by police in 1981. Not properly interviewed until case reopened."

and

"She first spoke to police on Sunday, June 21, 1981. And then not again for 20 years."

Here is a googlemap showing from 53 Lake N to 70 Jerome.. would take 7 minutes by taking the long way around, but would be shorter if went through the ravine? Seems like it could be plausible that this woman may have witnessed something important. She estimated the time to be around 1:30am, which could also make sense if DW had left Malarkey's around midnight, had sex and smoked up with RB, then started on her journey home.. CV could have found her when she exited RB's vehicle, if he showed up there after work and found she wasn't home?

 

[Claroon]

I am feeling really appalled at the seeming lack of investigation into the details of potential evidence in DW's murder case. This witness spoke to police way back when it happened, but yet she wasn't 'properly interviewed' until 2001??? It's not like the police even had another suspect in mind and were refusing to consider alternates. The case went cold, and yet they seemed to have at least a few clues that *we* know of that seem like they should have been followed up on much better. It's hard to imagine. Sure glad it isn't someone that *I* love who stands accused of this murder and perhaps wouldn't be there if not for such seemingly bad followup. ie this woman's testimony (Perhaps we're not hearing all of the testimony due to the tweeting??), was the woman able to say that the woman in the street *could* have been the same woman in DW's photograph? Could she hear anything they were saying? (It was summertime, so the window likely would've been open). If so, what were they fighting about? Were they noticed by any other neighbours at the time? What was CV's hairstyle like at that time? And why was there not an appeal from RB's defence team when they were told they weren't allowed to mention CV's semen being found in her panties that night?

"She was canvassed by police in 1981. Not properly interviewed until case reopened."

and

"She first spoke to police on Sunday, June 21, 1981. And then not again for 20 years."

Here is a googlemap showing from 53 Lake N to 70 Jerome.. would take 7 minutes by taking the long way around, but would be shorter if went through the ravine? Seems like it could be plausible that this woman may have witnessed something important. She estimated the time to be around 1:30am, which could also make sense if DW had left Malarkey's around midnight, had sex and smoked up with RB, then started on her journey home.. CV could have found her when she exited RB's vehicle, if he showed up there after work and found she wasn't home?

I totally agree with you. I think this lady lived right beside a park cut-through close to 50 Jerome right where things went down. We don't know but they should have canvassed the area for other witnesses. I guess they didn't have any suspects for many years to find out if they wore cowboy or motorcycle boots.

(My current husband bought cowboy boots in '81 while he was in Alberta. But he didn't wear them back here in ON. I don't recall them being worn by guys in that era around here. And talk about era--I'm pretty sure my wedding dress from my first wedding in '81 was the same as hers (lol) with that high neckline and sweetheart dip at the chest but I didn't have a veil like that. )

Now, if BM frequented Alberta, maybe he bought some boots out there too. But it seems more likely to me someone on a motorcycle would wear them.

LE should have canvassed everyone on the shift in Dofasco with the assistance of the guard and make the guard point out a likely person he saw.

The perp could be someone totally different too--from any bar that happened upon her drunk the way the witness said he seemed to be staggering.

Or the perp might have left his bike at the end of the road where he saw her and that's why he was running back later--to get back on it.

I want to know if CV worked in a local bar in the area?

RB seemed calm and sweet in that wedding video not even a year after the death. I can see why girls fell for him back then. IMO

 

[Claroon]

From my Google map sleuthing and looking for house numbers, I'm thinking this 53 Lake may have been torn down and that is where the playground is now. You will see from photo #2, the ravine just down from where the house may have been.

View attachment 104060 View attachment 104061

 

[deugirtni]

From my Google map sleuthing and looking for house numbers, I'm thinking this 53 Lake may have been torn down and that is where the playground is now. You will see from photo #2, the ravine just down from where the house may have been.

I don't know if it is just *my* computer, but I can't open your attachments.