Found Deceased Canada - Shannon Burgess, 25, Calgary, 26 Nov 2014 - #1 *Arrest*

[deugirtni]

I am confused about where you are seeing that SB was heard from on Friday afternoon. On SB's sister's (EM's) FB dated December 4th, she says this (via someone else, whose privacy settings are set so that we cannot see her posts) (BBM). If people are saying she hasn't actually been 'heard from' since Wednesday, perhaps some are not taking at face value the husband's assertion that he last 'saw her' just after midnight that same day (which by 12:30am had become Thursday):

Erin Madill via Meghan Cooper
December 4 at 12:40am ·

Shannon H Burgess is still missing and hasn't actually been hear from since Wednesday. She was actually last seen in Calgary not Edmonton though she does have contacts in Edmonton as well.

Again... it is wording. The last time SB was SEEN was on the 27th. The same sister in MSM was the one who posted that they last HEARD from her on Friday. If that additional communication was in the form of a text or PM, then it is not considered being SEEN. Given that there is no way to prove that the person who sent a digital message was SB, they have to go off when she was last physically seen.

 

[news.talk]

I am confused about where you are seeing that SB was heard from on Friday afternoon. On SB's sister's (EM's) FB dated December 4th, she says this (via someone else, whose privacy settings are set so that we cannot see her posts) (BBM). If people are saying she hasn't actually been 'heard from' since Wednesday, perhaps some are not taking at face value the husband's assertion that he las 'saw her' just after midnight that same day (which by 12:30am had become Thursday):

The lovely LaLa has found an update on the sister-in-law's page that they may not have received a reply to that Friday correspondence.

 

[deugirtni]

I am so curious as to why, if CPS received the file on January 9th, 2013, they wouldn't have executed a search warrant on the missing woman's home until eleven months later, on December 5th, 2014??

The reason her body wasn't found in her own home is because the case was first reported to the RCMP, and managed by the RCMP. It took a long time before Calgary police could get a search warrant:

"Police say Mitchell was last seen Oct. 29, 2012 at the couple’s Ogden home in the 7600 block of 26A Street S.E. ... The investigation was turned over to the Calgary Police Service on Jan. 9, 2013 [by RCMP], which led officers to execute a search warrant Friday [Dec 5, 2014] at the Ogden home."

http://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/police-investigation-underway-at-ogden-home

 

[news.talk]

I am so curous as to why, if CPS received the file on January 9th, 2013, they wouldn't have executed a search warrant on the missing woman's home until eleven months later, on December 5th, 2014??

I totally agree... I cannot for the life of me understand why they never searched the home either. The only thing I can guess, is that maybe they were not able to search without a warrant and for a warrant there was no probable cause. Since they have a cadaver dog, I would think it logical to bring him to the home durine a 'routine interview' and see if he detected anything. It is unclear if the body was frozen or somewhere else, but I would think Sully would be able to detect anything.

 

[deugirtni]

Ok fellow sleuthers, I have just 'joined' this thread, and after reading much of the thread.. I have the following thoughts/questions:

i)how do we know the couple (SB and JB) are estranged? It seems odd that if estranged, and if in a messy separation, the two would be still living together, and also odd that the family would include the estranged husband in the family presser? Apparently the estrangement was noted in an MSM article, but do we know it is accurate? It just seems odd that LE haven't mentioned it, nor the family? (or have they and I just missed that?)

ii)in regard to SB's family members not listing JB as a 'friend' on their FB, I think this may have something to do with the various persons' privacy settings. Many of the family members have their friends blocked so that only other friends can see them, and not the general public (like us for example). I am wondering if this could be why he shows up only on the sister-in-law's 'friends list', since hers are not hidden?

iii)I am thinking that if SB's family had any inklings or reasons to suspect that their missing family member's husband had anything to do with her disappearance, he would not have been invited to attend the presser?

iv)in regard to the supposed marriage in May of SB to JB, to me it sounds like JB was kind of the puppet-guy, and SB called the shots. On SB's FB post dated May 1st, she announced that she is 'just going to go ahead and get married on Sunday' and included JB's FB link in that post. Presumably the date for said marriage would be May 4th, 2014 as she later indicated May 4th, and also that there would be no wedding to invite people to attend; JB then replied to SB's marriage statement (in the wee hours of May 2nd) that 'it was the first he'd heard about it', to which SB responded that 'she knew she had forgotten to tell *someone*'. Much later in the day on May 2nd (and May 2nd is only two days prior to the apparent planned marriage), in response to same post, JB said 'SB was stuck with him now, no refunds!' To me, that sounds like it was SB who was in rather a hurry to have this marriage happen, but that JB was perfectly willing to accommodate.

To me, and of course, appearances mean nothing, he seems like a rather shy guy; in photos his hands seem to be often in his pockets in photos, he kind of often seems to hide his smile, kind of nerdy looking.. perhaps rather a little on the boring side(?), he worked for the government apparently. I'll bet he was head over heels for SB. To have him kind of change appearance over the next few months after SB perhaps started making her desired changes in him after marriage, doesn't surprise me at all. In the presser when someone noted his head was down, that could just be his shyness coming through again. Also, I dont' think it is weird that he didn't speak, because none of the other family members spoke either. Just the one sister was the family spokesperson.

v)in one post, someone mentioned that JB was also into acting, but I couldnt' find a reference to that anywhere, does anyone have a link?

 

[deugirtni]

I know that if I gave my dogs a frozen bone, they would not care that it was frozen, and they could still have no problem smelling that bone. I wonder if that home *was* initially searched, but ... who knows, perhaps at that time it was not protocol to open every refrigerator and freezer in a household to look for a missing person, and especially if there were some thoughts that the missing woman could have just left and gone somewhere else, and perhaps even been 'mistakenly spotted' in other locations. It wouldn't make sense that if a missing person's report were filed, that LE would not have visited the home to search for said missing person.

ETA: Sadly, I do hope it has since become protocol that in all missing persons cases, all appliances are looked into right away at the time of the initial search of the missing person's home.

I totally agree... I cannot for the life of me understand why they never searched the home either. The only thing I can guess, is that maybe they were not able to search without a warrant and for a warrant there was no probable cause. Since they have a cadaver dog, I would think it logical to bring him to the home durine a 'routine interview' and see if he detected anything. It is unclear if the body was frozen or somewhere else, but I would think Sully would be able to detect anything.

 

[otto]

In the link quoted in your reply post above, it says the couple shared a home in Ramsey. I'm confused. (BBM)

Thank you so much for finding that information. That helps so much in terms of setting out the fact. That puts an end to any speculation about any other property, and provides a clear explanation as to why her husband last saw her at the home they shared at 12:30AM on Wednesday.

"Shannon was last seen in the early morning hours of Thursday, November 27, at her home in the 1900 block of Spiller Rd. S.E in the community of Ramsay, a home she shares with her husband Josh."

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/family-sa...disappear-without-contacting-anyone-1.2134851

 

[otto]

Welcome to the wonderful world of MSM. One cannot alwaya trust the facts as reported.

Until there is factual information that contradicts the information that was provided during the press conference, it is reasonable to accept the information that is reported.

Police clearly state during the press conference that there has been no contact from Shannon after the reported time of late Wednesday.

Shannon's sister clearly states during the press conference that when Josh "returned home" that night (Monday), and "she wasn't there", then the sister contacted police.

Shannon and her husband lived together in the 1900 block of Spiller Road NE Calgary.

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=507836

Rumours about her husband living somewhere else, or owning some other property are nothing but unsubstantiated rumour and serve no purpose other than to confuse the facts.

 

[otto]

Exactly. Because the implications of the two scenarios lead to different questions. If he didn't live there why was he there at that time? Just passing by?

The husband lived with Shannon. That information is provided by Shannon's family during the press conference.

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=507836

 

[otto]

The lovely LaLa has found an update on the sister-in-law's page that they may not have received a reply to that Friday correspondence.

Fortunately, we can rely on information supplied by police during the press conference on Dec 5, so we know that there was no communication from Shannon to anyone after she was last seen by her husband late Wednesday night at the home they shared on Spiller Road.

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=507836

 

[otto]

I am so curious as to why, if CPS received the file on January 9th, 2013, they wouldn't have executed a search warrant on the missing woman's home until eleven months later, on December 5th, 2014??

Police need probable cause to execute a search warrant. It took almost two years (Jan 2013 - Dec 2014) before they had probable cause. That's all there is to it. Probable cause most likely came from a tip, or a wiretap.

 

[otto]

I totally agree... I cannot for the life of me understand why they never searched the home either. The only thing I can guess, is that maybe they were not able to search without a warrant and for a warrant there was no probable cause. Since they have a cadaver dog, I would think it logical to bring him to the home durine a 'routine interview' and see if he detected anything. It is unclear if the body was frozen or somewhere else, but I would think Sully would be able to detect anything.

BBM

Police have to follow the law and obtain a search warrant before they can enter a private residence. They have to provide evidence to the prosecutor that there are grounds to believe that a crime was committed inside the property. The prosecutor has to take that evidence to a Judge, and the judge has to sign off on it. Clearly it took two years before police had evidence that led to probable cause.

Police cannot conduct a routine interview with a cadaver dog in a private residence without permission from the home owner allowing police to enter the property. Clearly the owner did not allow police in the house at any time prior to the search warrant ... so clearly no interviews were conducted in the home with, or without, cadaver dogs.

 

[news.talk]

BBM

Police have to follow the law and obtain a search warrant before they can enter a private residence. They have to provide evidence to the prosecutor that there are grounds to believe that a crime was committed inside the property. The prosecutor has to take that evidence to a Judge, and the judge has to sign off on it. Clearly it took two years before police had evidence that led to probable cause.

Police cannot conduct a routine interview with a cadaver dog in a private residence without permission from the home owner allowing police to enter the property. Clearly the owner did not allow police in the house at any time prior to the search warrant ... so clearly no interviews were conducted in the home with, or without, cadaver dogs.

When someone is missing, LE routinely visit the family. If the husband didn't allow them to enter, that would be a serious red flag.

 

[deugirtni]

OMG yes, I was thinking 11 months, but it is 2 YEARS. Jeez, wouldn't one hope that just being 'missing' would be enough to garner a search warrant for the 'missing person's' home, and where her child(ren) also lived, to perhaps also check on their welfare at same time?

Police need probable cause to execute a search warrant. It took almost two years (Jan 2013 - Dec 2014) before they had probable cause. That's all there is to it. Probable cause most likely came from a tip, or a wiretap.

 

[otto]

OMG yes, I was thinking 11 months, but it is 2 YEARS. Jeez, wouldn't one hope that just being 'missing' would be enough to garner a search warrant for the 'missing person's' home, and where her child(ren) also lived, to perhaps also check on their welfare at same time?

It was two years before police had probable cause to enter the home (Mitchell case) with a search warrant to check the home where the missing person lived. It's unfortunate that it took so long, but it's also reassuring to know that police continued to investigate regardless of roadblocks ... and in the absence of media reports.

Regarding Shannon's phone, since the couple lived together, I find it highly unusual that the husband did not raise the alert that she was missing and without her phone even after five days. Shannon's father was the first to become concerned, which is when her sister contacted the husband. The husband did not respond until the end of the work day on Monday. When the husband told the sister that Shannon wasn't at home, the police were contacted. My guess is that the husband would never have reported her missing, not even to family - which I find problematic. I also find it problematic that the couple was living together, but estranged.

 

[news.talk]

It was two years before police had probable cause to enter the home (Mitchell case) with a search warrant to check the home where the missing person lived. It's unfortunate that it took so long, but it's also reassuring to know that police continued to investigate regardless of roadblocks ... and in the absence of media reports.

Regarding Shannon's phone, since the couple lived together, I find it highly unusual that the husband did not raise the alert that she was missing and without her phone even after five days. Shannon's father was the first to become concerned, which is when her sister contacted the husband. The husband did not respond until the end of the work day on Monday. When the husband told the sister that Shannon wasn't at home, the police were contacted. My guess is that the husband would never have reported her missing, not even to family - which I find problematic. I also find it problematic that the couple was living together, but estranged.

Just to clarify... It was stated in several MSM reports, that it was her brother (not the father) who was initially concerned:

"Family became concerned when Burgess failed to meet up with her brother at a show at Stage West, Madill told reporters."

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/police-search-for-calgary-woman-who-disappeared-a-week-ago

It has also been reported by MSM, that Shannon and her husband were indeed estranged:

"Burgess was last seen on Nov. 26 by her estranged husband in Calgary"

http://m.calgarysun.com/2014/12/03/family-seeking-clues-in-missing--womans-disappearance

In fairness, not all MSM are reporting the status of her marriage the same. It certainly leaves open many questions, including but not limited to, whether they still resided at the same address.

 

[otto]

Photos of Shannon Burgess, and of her family at the press conference.

Photo of Shannon: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/12/05/shannon-burgess-missing_n_6278132.html
Press Conference Stills: http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=507836

 

[otto]

Just to clarify... It was stated in several MSM reports, that it was her brother (not the father) who was initially concerned:

"Family became concerned when Burgess failed to meet up with her brother at a show at Stage West, Madill told reporters."

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/police-search-for-calgary-woman-who-disappeared-a-week-ago

It has also been reported by MSM, that Shannon and her husband were indeed estranged:

"Burgess was last seen on Nov. 26 by her estranged husband in Calgary"

http://m.calgarysun.com/2014/12/03/family-seeking-clues-in-missing--womans-disappearance

In fairness, not all MSM are reporting the status of her marriage the same. It certainly leaves open many questions, including but not limited to, whether they still resided at the same address.

"We became concerned when my father called me on Monday - she didn't actually show up for an evening with my younger brother ..." - Sister statement during Press Conference; http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=507836. It's true that the father became concerned when Shannon missed an appointment with her brother, but it was Shannon's father that phoned her sister on Monday.

The couple are estranged, but living in the same house. There are no inconsistencies in what has been reported about the case. I don't see any reason to criticize police or media. This is about a missing woman, not media reporting and police conduct.

 

[otto]

It seems to me that if this discussion is going to be side-tracked with constant discussion about the integrity of media reporting and police conduct (as with the Liknes/Obrien case), there should be a separate thread for that discussion.

 

[news.talk]

"We became concerned when my father called me on Monday - she didn't actually show up for an evening with my younger brother ..." - Sister statement during Press Conference; http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=507836. It's true that the father became concerned when Shannon missed an appointment with her brother, but it was Shannon's father that phoned her sister on Monday.

The couple are estranged, but living in the same house. There are no inconsistencies in what has been reported about the case. I don't see any reason to criticize police or media. This is about a missing woman, not media reporting and police conduct.

No one is criticizing anyone... Just observations and questioning reported statements to clarify and uncover the truth. It is equally dangerous to trust everything stated without question as it is to ignore it.