GUILTY Canada - Renee Sweeney, 23, murdered, Sudbury, Ont, 27 Jan 1998 *arrest in 2018*

[JuneBug67]

Perhaps, but would those reasons be under a publication ban? Seem like something the judge would be willing to put into the public record...

JMO

We'd have to know who requested the ban. If the defence requested it, the judge has to grant it.

 

[Gina20]

Perhaps, but would those reasons be under a publication ban? Seem like something the judge would be willing to put into the public record...

JMO

Agreed. The four failed attempts to get bail, the appeal and the publication ban seem to make this something out of the ordinary.

Meanwhile, here's more from today:

Witness saw older man enter adult video store just before murder

Based in part on his information, Sudbury police arrested and charged a suspect, then released him a few days later.

thesudburystar.com

 

[JuneBug67]

Agreed. The four failed attempts to get bail, the appeal and the publication ban seem to make this something out of the ordinary.

Meanwhile, here's more from today:

Witness saw older man enter adult video store just before murder

Based in part on his information, Sudbury police arrested and charged a suspect, then released him a few days later.

thesudburystar.com

I think the four attempts to get bail is at least in part the result of having expensive lawyers in a high profile case. It's agressive defense and a way to signal to the public that you think you have an innocent client. He also switched lawyers part way through, so it makes sense that the new lawyer would take a shot at it.

The publication bans don't strike me as particlarly unusual, especially in high profile cases. By law, If the client wants one, they get one. And they often want one.

 

[Gina20]

I think the four attempts to get bail is at least in part the result of having expensive lawyers in a high profile case. It's agressive defense and a way to signal to the public that you think you have an innocent client. He also switched lawyers part way through, so it makes sense that the new lawyer would take a shot at it.

The publication bans don't strike me as particlarly unusual, especially in high profile cases. By law, If the client wants one, they get one. And they often want one.

So with a team of expensive lawyers, difficulty finding an adequate surety for bail seems off the table. Speculation.

 

[JuneBug67]

So with a team of expensive lawyers, difficulty finding an adequate surety for bail seems off the table. Speculation.

Yeah, the question of an adequate surety is super interesting. His parents? They're the ones he was living with during the crime and there is some evidence that the may have concealed his involvement. His wife? She lives in North Bay, or at least did at the time of his arrest. Brother/sister again were in the home at the time of the crime. Who knows if others would have been willing to take on the burden and the stigma.

Regardless, I think Jesus himself could have offered to be a surety and the judge would have denied bail. I just don't think you can get past the 'faith in the administration of justice' piece in this case.

 

[musicaljoke]

Could the four denied attempts at bail and the publication ban be related to a violent juvenile criminal record?

 

[JuneBug67]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/sudbury-sweeney-trial-day-fifteen-1.6780834

More people should still be masking if they are able, especially when a process can be derailed by the absence of just one or two people. Now who knows who is at some degree of risk on the jury panel or in the courtroom. Hell, even the presumed innocent defendent was hospitalized in Toronto for COVID previously at a relatively young age. SMDH

 

[dotr]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/sudbury-sweeney-trial-day-fifteen-1.6780834

More people should still be masking if they are able, especially when a process can be derailed by the absence of just one or two people. Now who knows who is at some degree of risk on the jury panel or in the courtroom. Hell, even the presumed innocent defendent was hospitalized in Toronto for COVID previously at a relatively young age. SMDH

rbbm.
''Justice Robert Gordon told the courtroom in Sudbury, that one of the members of the jury has tested positive for the illness.

Gordon said the jury member has been instructed to self-isolate for the next 48-hours. And to be safe, he advised the remaining jury members to do the same should they develop symptoms.

Barring any other positive cases among the jury that may emerge over the weekend, Gordon said court will resume on Monday. ''

 

[Gina20]

So much has gone into bringing this case to trial. Now it could all be in jeopardy.

 

[JuneBug67]

rbbm.
''Justice Robert Gordon told the courtroom in Sudbury, that one of the members of the jury has tested positive for the illness.

Gordon said the jury member has been instructed to self-isolate for the next 48-hours. And to be safe, he advised the remaining jury members to do the same should they develop symptoms.

Barring any other positive cases among the jury that may emerge over the weekend, Gordon said court will resume on Monday. ''

It's within the offical 5 day period for self isolating, but it still feels risky. People are frequently contagious for longer periods, and most contagious in the day or two before symptoms appear. Most importantly I hope all the people participating in this process are okay, and secondly I hope the process is okay!

I wonder if the defence sees it as advantageous to have this extended break in the middle of their evidence.

 

[Gina20]

It's within the offical 5 day period for self isolating, but it still feels risky. People are frequently contagious for longer periods, and most contagious in the day or two before symptoms appear. Most importantly I hope all the people participating in this process are okay, and secondly I hope the process is okay!

I wonder if the defence sees it as advantageous to have this extended break in the middle of their evidence.

Jurors face trauma from what they see and hear in the courtroom, loss of income and now potential health consequences for doing their civic duty. It's a lot.

 

[musicaljoke]

Jurors face trauma from what they see and hear in the courtroom, loss of income and now potential health consequences for doing their civic duty. It's a lot.

Do you know if they were wearing masks in the courtroom?

 

[JuneBug67]

Do you know if they were wearing masks in the courtroom?

I've only seen one sketch from the courtroom and it only showed the faces of Wright and one court staff. You wouldn't expect Wright to be wearing one on the stand either way probably, but the court staff member depicted did not have one.

Sudbury murder suspect finishes testimony, denies involvement in stabbing death

Tuesday afternoon, the Crown accused Robert Steven Wright of stabbing Renee Sweeney to death following a struggle inside the Adults Only Video store in January 1998.

northernontario.ctvnews.ca

 

[Gina20]

Do you know if they were wearing masks in the courtroom?

Guidelines here:

Ontario court locations, service hours and contacts | ontario.ca

www.ontario.ca

Jurors can choose to wear a mask, but no one has reported if they are doing so. Also, the quality of the optional masks provided is probably surgical, as that's all I've seen in government offices where I am. I've never seen KN-95s or N-95s provided free of charge. Certainly respirators are not given away.

 

[Gina20]

Guidelines here:

Ontario court locations, service hours and contacts | ontario.ca

www.ontario.ca

Jurors can choose to wear a mask, but no one has reported if they are doing so. Also, the quality of the optional masks provided is probably surgical, as that's all I've seen in government offices where I am. I've never seen KN-95s or N-95s provided free of charge. Certainly respirators are not given away.

Note: no mention of HEPA filtration or Corsi-Rosenthal.

 

[Gina20]

Dog bandanas honour beloved sister and raise money for Pet Save

'People are really taking to this and I’m just blown away at the support'

www.thesudburystar.com

Vehicles and dogs around Sudbury and beyond are honoring Renee's memory.

 

[zerotohero]

Guidelines here:

Ontario court locations, service hours and contacts | ontario.ca

www.ontario.ca

Jurors can choose to wear a mask, but no one has reported if they are doing so. Also, the quality of the optional masks provided is probably surgical, as that's all I've seen in government offices where I am. I've never seen KN-95s or N-95s provided free of charge. Certainly respirators are not given away.

With a trial scheduled to run in excess of 4 weeks, it seems irresponsible to me to not require covid precautions like masks in the courtroom to minimize the possibility of disruptions like this. It's even unfair to the defendant, who has been waiting to have his time in court for more than four years. But such is life in the new normal I suppose.

This case has haunted me since 1998 as someone who went to the same high school as the accused, but started a year after. Now that it's come to trial I must admit I'm curious about why the Crown's case seems to rest almost entirely on the DNA evidence -- it's thinner than I'd like, especially given they haven't been able to narrow down the timeline for when the defendant left his exam. As I recall from being a student there, Lockerby's exams ran 2 hours on average, but you could leave after an hour if you were finished; many left shortly after, and probably only a handful stuck around the full 2 hours. It's unfortunate for both sides that no one could attest to when he left, but I suspect it works in his favour, as the exam running til 11 theoretically shortens the window of opportunity.

The defendant's story in his testimony seems both convoluted and convenient, the kind of thing you'd say if you know your DNA was found at the scene you were witnessed fleeing -- and particularly on the bottom of the cash box in what also turned out to be a robbery, where you happened to be using your famously discarded jacket as a bag (for his gardening gloves, he claimed). But with the timeline of who was in the store prior being largely unaccounted for, his own timeline fuzzy, and a witness testifying that someone else was entering the store prior, I can see a path to reasonable doubt for the defence, if I squint.

Of particular interest are the stolen items, which seem to closely match the items that someone purchased at the store some time before 11, per Sweeney's phone call with her boss. It would've been good to nail down the time the defendant left his exam, as that would establish whether it was possible he was the same person who purchased the items previously; I suspect that would help persuade a jury that is looking at the possibility that someone went into the store shortly before him and not certain who was responsible for what. In any event, I'm curious about why it seems the Crown did not push him too hard on the stand about not coming forward with his evidence as a witness for more than twenty years, let alone on the day he claims he found her on the scene -- not very Boy Scout of him to flee past two witnesses who remain at the scene, then another on the sidewalk who remains at the scene, only to discard his clothing and never contact police!

 

[musicaljoke]

With a trial scheduled to run in excess of 4 weeks, it seems irresponsible to me to not require covid precautions like masks in the courtroom to minimize the possibility of disruptions like this. It's even unfair to the defendant, who has been waiting to have his time in court for more than four years. But such is life in the new normal I suppose.

This case has haunted me since 1998 as someone who went to the same high school as the accused, but started a year after. Now that it's come to trial I must admit I'm curious about why the Crown's case seems to rest almost entirely on the DNA evidence -- it's thinner than I'd like, especially given they haven't been able to narrow down the timeline for when the defendant left his exam. As I recall from being a student there, Lockerby's exams ran 2 hours on average, but you could leave after an hour if you were finished; many left shortly after, and probably only a handful stuck around the full 2 hours. It's unfortunate for both sides that no one could attest to when he left, but I suspect it works in his favour, as the exam running til 11 theoretically shortens the window of opportunity.

The defendant's story in his testimony seems both convoluted and convenient, the kind of thing you'd say if you know your DNA was found at the scene you were witnessed fleeing -- and particularly on the bottom of the cash box in what also turned out to be a robbery, where you happened to be using your famously discarded jacket as a bag (for his gardening gloves, he claimed). But with the timeline of who was in the store prior being largely unaccounted for, his own timeline fuzzy, and a witness testifying that someone else was entering the store prior, I can see a path to reasonable doubt for the defence, if I squint.

Of particular interest are the stolen items, which seem to closely match the items that someone purchased at the store some time before 11, per Sweeney's phone call with her boss. It would've been good to nail down the time the defendant left his exam, as that would establish whether it was possible he was the same person who purchased the items previously; I suspect that would help persuade a jury that is looking at the possibility that someone went into the store shortly before him and not certain who was responsible for what. In any event, I'm curious about why it seems the Crown did not push him too hard on the stand about not coming forward with his evidence as a witness for more than twenty years, let alone on the day he claims he found her on the scene -- not very Boy Scout of him to flee past two witnesses who remain at the scene, then another on the sidewalk who remains at the scene, only to discard his clothing and never contact police!

Thanks for this really informative first post! It's good to hear from someone who went to the same high school. Were you a year behind him, or did you start attending a year after he graduated?

If you were attending at the same time, do you recall posters going up showing the teal jacket? It seems very odd to me that no one reported that they had seen the jacket, especially such a visible one. It seems to me that every adult in Sudbury wears a black winter coat, so a teal spring jacket is rather vivid. If no one saw the jacket, perhaps it could be because it wasn't worn out on the street or on the bus, just just in the video store.

 

[zerotohero]

Thanks for this really informative first post! It's good to hear from someone who went to the same high school. Were you a year behind him, or did you start attending a year after he graduated?

If you were attending at the same time, do you recall posters going up showing the teal jacket? It seems very odd to me that no one reported that they had seen the jacket, especially such a visible one. It seems to me that every adult in Sudbury wears a black winter coat, so a teal spring jacket is rather vivid. If no one saw the jacket, perhaps it could be because it wasn't worn out on the street or on the bus, just just in the video store.

I started there the next year. One of my older siblings had classes with him and didn't remember him all that well except to say that he was quiet, nice, a bit nerdy -- was taken aback when he was arrested.

I definitely remember seeing the photo of the jacket. It was everywhere on the news, in papers, and on posters; it was even on bulletin boards in coffee shops and convenience stores. The feeling a lot of people had at the time was that it was probably planned because who would wear that on a cold winter day in Sudbury? Alternately, it was an effort to be disguised because the person was embarrassed being in an adult video store. But it would be very strange to walk the 10 minutes or so from Lockerby to there wearing that jacket and white gardening gloves on a -15ish celsius day.

 

[musicaljoke]

I started there the next year. One of my older siblings had classes with him and didn't remember him all that well except to say that he was quiet, nice, a bit nerdy -- was taken aback when he was arrested.

I definitely remember seeing the photo of the jacket. It was everywhere on the news, in papers, and on posters; it was even on bulletin boards in coffee shops and convenience stores. The feeling a lot of people had at the time was that it was probably planned because who would wear that on a cold winter day in Sudbury? Alternately, it was an effort to be disguised because the person was embarrassed being in an adult video store. But it would be very strange to walk the 10 minutes or so from Lockerby to there wearing that jacket and white gardening gloves on a -15ish celsius day.

Yes, I also think that the jacket and gardening gloves were part of the plan and not worn on the street. He certainly took them off before leaving the video store. I can't imagine how he got out of the high school and made it to the store in that gear without being remembered, so perhaps he didn't wear it to the store either.

I've wondered what went through the mind of the father who apparently owned the jacket. Did it not occur to him that his own teal jacket which was identical to the one in the posters, was suddenly missing from his closet? There is no way that he didn't see the posters.