GUILTY Canada - Marie-France Comeau, 37, & Jessica Lloyd, 27, slain, Ont, 2009 & 2010 - #3

[Pink Panther]

I'm more inclined to believe that this guy was a "bird watcher" as per the uk definition of such. I sincerely doubt that RW took any interest whatsoever in watching actual birds.

MOO

 

[Wondergirl]

Sorry if I'm repeating any info here, but the duck logo on the woodland rapist's shirt reminded me that RW was a birdwatcher. I'm not sure how far back his interest in birds goes.

I'm more inclined to believe that this guy was a "bird watcher" as per the uk definition of such. I sincerely doubt that RW took any interest whatsoever in watching actual birds.

MOO

He WAS a birdwatcher. He appeared to be keeping a journal of "bird sightings" for these folks:

WEEKLY BIRD REPORT FOR PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY AND THE QUINTE AREA FOR THE WEEK ENDING

Thursday, May 14, 2009


And that's it for this week from Prince Edward County and the Quinte area. Our thanks to .......Russ Williams....for their contributions to this week's report.

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg18442.html


What about this Society in Toronto??? This picture made me shudder.

http://www.torontobirding.ca/club/memberoftheyear.php

 

[Summersolstice]

He WAS a birdwatcher. He appeared to be keeping a journal of "bird sightings" for these folks:

WEEKLY BIRD REPORT FOR PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY AND THE QUINTE AREA FOR THE WEEK ENDING

Thursday, May 14, 2009


And that's it for this week from Prince Edward County and the Quinte area. Our thanks to .......Russ Williams....for their contributions to this week's report.

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg18442.html


What about this Society in Toronto??? This picture made me shudder.

http://www.torontobirding.ca/club/memberoftheyear.php

She looks like a very nice lady to me.

 

[matou]

He WAS a birdwatcher. He appeared to be keeping a journal of "bird sightings" for these folks:

WEEKLY BIRD REPORT FOR PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY AND THE QUINTE AREA FOR THE WEEK ENDING

Thursday, May 14, 2009


And that's it for this week from Prince Edward County and the Quinte area. Our thanks to .......Russ Williams....for their contributions to this week's report.

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg18442.html


What about this Society in Toronto??? This picture made me shudder.

http://www.torontobirding.ca/club/memberoftheyear.php

Thanks for that, I was sure that I remembered he was into birds (the real ones and the ladies). I also remember that he used his remote control camera to photograph wildlife, particularly birds. I'm sure this was just a cover to use his equipment for use in crimes. I'm not sure if I think he would be the suspect in the Woodland rapist case and sexually assault young boys and girls. He IS a monster, though, so anything is possible. I hope that LE has compared DNA in both of these cases.

The soiled underwear on the head....now I have to think about that. Does the woodland rapist have a panty/underwear fetish as well?

 

[Wondergirl]

I thought this was interesting, relating to Internet postings in criminal cases. I believe this was relevant with the whole "Ryan M." thing, in the original flyers that were posted on FB etc., at the beginning of JL's case.

For Burnett, the case is another example of how the internet can circumvent official channels such as police agencies or media outlets to distribute information.

There is also a danger that people putting such information online could face a range of penalties, Burnett said.

If they call someone a suspect and turn out to be wrong, they could be sued for libel. If they release information that tips off a suspect or hampers a police investigation, they could be charged with obstruction of justice.

There is even a risk of tainting a police lineup through a photo posted online.

Police "have to be aware that information about an investigation may not be as secret as it once was, and so they have to be prepared to deal with it publicly," Burnett said.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewa...#ixzz0qBZ9K51o

 

[antiquegirl]

I thought this was interesting, relating to Internet postings in criminal cases. I believe this was relevant with the whole "Ryan M." thing, in the original flyers that were posted on FB etc., at the beginning of JL's case.

For Burnett, the case is another example of how the internet can circumvent official channels such as police agencies or media outlets to distribute information.

There is also a danger that people putting such information online could face a range of penalties, Burnett said.

If they call someone a suspect and turn out to be wrong, they could be sued for libel. If they release information that tips off a suspect or hampers a police investigation, they could be charged with obstruction of justice.

There is even a risk of tainting a police lineup through a photo posted online.

Police "have to be aware that information about an investigation may not be as secret as it once was, and so they have to be prepared to deal with it publicly," Burnett said.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewa...#ixzz0qBZ9K51o

That's an interesting article and raises several important points. Thanks for posting it. (The link no longer worked for me, but I was able to find the piece and picture by Googling a quote from it.)

Off topic:

As of Tuesday, police had not even publicly confirmed LaFortune's identity.

Based on the comparison of the "before and after" photos, I personally don't believe it is the same man. The position of the eyebrows and ears and the size of the chin are completely different. No amount of torture should have been able to change that. JMO

 

[nobodyzgirl]

That's an interesting article and raises several important points. Thanks for posting it. (The link no longer worked for me, but I was able to find the piece and picture by Googling a quote from it.)

Off topic:



Based on the comparison of the "before and after" photos, I personally don't believe it is the same man. The position of the eyebrows and ears and the size of the chin are completely different. No amount of torture should have been able to change that. JMO

There has been a lot of media coverage about it, so it's hard to say. There is a forum on WS about him if you are interested in reading it AG.

Tortured and emaciated man dropped off at Canadian hospital - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Also, I see a resemblance to the tortured man with this picture, though that's just MOO

 

[Summersolstice]

It's about time this was posted, if it hasn't been posted already:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Larry...rry-Jones-has-our-support/356435130882?v=info

 

[matou]

Some info about how RW's wife is handling things.

"The revelation of these charges has been devastating to me," Harriman says.

"As a result of the charges, my previously anticipated future and financial security had (sic) become jeopardized."

"The publication of further particular details of my professional life, personal financial situation and legal affairs could have a significant negative impact upon me personally and professionally."

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/lo...affadavit-100608/20100608/?hub=TorontoNewHome

 

[Summersolstice]

Some info about how RW's wife is handling things.





http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/lo...affadavit-100608/20100608/?hub=TorontoNewHome

In a democracy, it is not enough for justice to be done. Justice must be seen to be done. Part of that process is laying the cards -- otherwise known as charges, allegations and evidence -- on the table.

No doubt families of those accused of crimes find that difficult. Exposing one's family to what could be an airing of one's dirty laundry in public is a process that isn't attractive to most people. However, if there is nothing to hide, the truth will prevail. This is how democracy works.

Anyone who considers breaking the law should ask themselves what kind of impact this will have on their loved ones. Committing a crime can be a selfish act in more respects than the impact on the victim(s). But we'll have to wait for the trial to know if any laws were broken in this case. Until then, allegations and charges are just that. Proof is required. The truth will come out in court.

 

[Wondergirl]

Has anyone read or heard of any marital visits by MEH to RW while incarcerated? I think there was reference to visits, prior to the attempted suicide. Have there been any since?

It is interesting that the published statements by MEH, according to her defence of the charges, appears to be seeking public reassurance that she herself is a victim. She has been represented in the media and by her own account, to be above reproach. I guess one could have also said that of her husband, prior to his arrest.

"My reputation in the community is exemplary," says Harriman, an associate executive director of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.

"The publication of further particular details of my professional life, personal financial situation and legal affairs could have a significant negative impact upon me personally and professionally."

I do wonder if in fact she is a victim, then why would she would be visiting her husband in jail? Is a divorce in the works? Is she standing by her man? It certainly appears that she is severing her ties with him, financially at least. Time will tell, I suppose.

By her own account, her only interest is financial, "against" her husband. I wonder if LE/Lawyers will bring forth witnesses to observations of MEH while visiting her husband in jail? This may provide some sort of proof of MEH's intentions. In fact, MEH herself would likely want witness testimony of her own actions and conversations after the arrest of her husband, I would think? Wouldn't that prove she was not doing anything untoward?

How will the lawyers for Jane Doe be able to prove the allegations? Is it a matter of convincing a judge/jury that the haste in the property transfer is indicative of some sort of malicious intent? How will they prove that? What sort of evidence is required, to be held liable?

"At all times my intent in executing the conveyance was to provide for my financial security as against my husband," Harriman writes.


http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/lo...affadavit-100608/20100608/?hub=TorontoNewHome

 

[Wondergirl]

My very amateur legal take on the civil case by Jane Doe:

If she can prove she was a victim, and the crimes were committed by RW, she will be entitled to various compensations, according to her requests.

If MEH and RW did not seek a Divorce:

The settlement JD is entitled to, should be paid from the joint marital funds. Any transfer of funds to MEH, without MEH seeking a Divorce, will likely be seen by a Court of Law to be an attempt to thwart funds, and thus RW's "half" would be used to settle the lawsuit, if deemed liable.

If MEH and RW sought Divorce:

Whatever the Divorce Agreement was, including asset allocation, at the time of signing, would be what the worth of each person was. I think this is where the intent to transfer fraudulantly would come into play. But wouldn't a Divorce take a long time to be finalized, anyway?

One thing seems certain: there will be a large amount of disclosure of personal and financial information for the defendants, and MEH IS a defendant. There are allegations of fraud, and that is not to be taken lightly, right?

 

[Macright]

another take on the same story..one interesting piece was the bit about his pension which could end up going to his wife.

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2010/06/09/14321291.html

 

[Wondergirl]

"Jane" said this deal was done under "suspicious circumstances" on March 26 and is an attempt to, according to her statement of claim, "remove assets from the jurisdiction or otherwise dispose of or dissipate them in an effort to defeat the plaintiff in any attempt to recover upon the judgment, if the plaintiff is ultimately successful."

Harriman has countered the transfer was done in good faith and it was a "domestic contract."
“At all times my intent in executing the conveyance was to provide for my financial security as against my husband,” Harriman said, who is an associate executive director of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.

Williams hasn't filed a statement of defence. None of the criminal charges or civil claims have been proven in court.

Williams is still collecting about $12,000 a month in pay from the Canadian Forces. If he is found guilty, Williams would have to pay back that money. He would still receive his pension, which could be signed over to Harriman.

Highlighted by me

What kind of "domestic contract"?

Is his wife entitled to his pension over a civil litigation claim?

Thanks for the link, Macright.

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2010/06/09/14321291.html

 

[Summersolstice]

If image and appearance are the greatest concern to MEH, I would suggest an out-of-court settlement, if I were her lawyer. But I'm not. Proceeding to court means letting the chips fall where they may, in full view of the public.

 

[Macright]

I'm not sure if his military pension is protected from any claims but he would receive approx. 50% of his salary and MEH is entitled to 50% of this amount whether they divorce or not.

 

[Summersolstice]

Has anyone read or heard of any marital visits by MEH to RW while incarcerated? I think there was reference to visits, prior to the attempted suicide. Have there been any since?

It is interesting that the published statements by MEH, according to her defence of the charges, appears to be seeking public reassurance that she herself is a victim. She has been represented in the media and by her own account, to be above reproach. I guess one could have also said that of her husband, prior to his arrest.

"The publication of further particular details of my professional life, personal financial situation and legal affairs could have a significant negative impact upon me personally and professionally."

I do wonder if in fact she is a victim, then why would she would be visiting her husband in jail? Is a divorce in the works? Is she standing by her man? It certainly appears that she is severing her ties with him, financially at least. Time will tell, I suppose.

By her own account, her only interest is financial, "against" her husband. I wonder if LE/Lawyers will bring forth witnesses to observations of MEH while visiting her husband in jail? This may provide some sort of proof of MEH's intentions. In fact, MEH herself would likely want witness testimony of her own actions and conversations after the arrest of her husband, I would think? Wouldn't that prove she was not doing anything untoward?

How will the lawyers for Jane Doe be able to prove the allegations? Is it a matter of convincing a judge/jury that the haste in the property transfer is indicative of some sort of malicious intent? How will they prove that? What sort of evidence is required, to be held liable?

"At all times my intent in executing the conveyance was to provide for my financial security as against my husband," Harriman writes.


http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/lo...affadavit-100608/20100608/?hub=TorontoNewHome

I'm having a hard time following MEH's logic:

"The publication of further particular details of my professional life, personal financial situation and legal affairs could have a significant negative impact upon me personally and professionally."

 

[Summersolstice]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...weed-left-by-russell-williams/article1597032/

Meanwhile, at Trenton:

http://www.intelligencer.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2615709

 

[Pink Panther]

OK. So let's look at this as a business. Two partners own 50/50 shares in whatever business they have. One partner gets arrested for drunk driving and killing someone. While he's in prison, awaiting trial on the matter he decides to transfer all of his 50 percent of the business to his partner. The family of the individual who has been killed (possibly a mother with children to support) no longer has any recourse to access the (potentially guilty) partner's funds for a civil suit??? Hmmm. MEH might be looking out for herself as she should be, but I'm quite sure that Jane Doe's lawyer's have a good handle on what they're doing and why!

ETA - I would be quite shocked if she hasn't already filed for divorce and at the very least, the whole issue could provide some favour to her point of view if she filed for such (divorce) prior to the division of assets.

Also "professional reputation" is not something that is easily defined but if the internet is worth anything in the matter, she is virtually invisible...Yes, of course she is the director of such-and-such but try and find a picture of her. Any information about her. Not much out there. Uncanny. I can find more info about my neighbors without a "professional reputation" than I can find about her.

JMO/MOO

 

[dotr]

I'm having a hard time following MEH's logic:

"The publication of further particular details of my professional life, personal financial situation and legal affairs could have a significant negative impact upon me personally and professionally."

Dare I say, that MEH should count herself as a very very lucky woman.



Some studies conducted in the United States reveal that each year approximately 4 million women are physically attacked by their husbands or partners.

http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=7584


In every country where reliable studies have been conducted, statistics show that between 10% and 50% of women report that they have been physically abused by an intimate partner during their lifetime.


According to the World Health Organization (WHO) data, the most devastating effect of gender violence worldwide is that violence against women claims almost 1.6 million lives each year — about 3% of deaths of all causes.


Domestic violence, violence that occurs in the home or within the family, is the most common kind of gender violence. It affects women regardless of age, education or socioeconomic status. Its victims are women in developing nations and Western countries alike.