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

[otto]

The video specifically says " she stopped returning CALLS last Friday, not texts.

Could you please post the link to the statement that Shannon continued texting on her phone - the phone that was left at her home when she vanished late Wednesday night - well after she was last accounted for.

 

[otto]

Otto, if you get a minute rewatch the pressers her sister gives. In the following one at the 30 SECOND mark she says " SHE STOPPED RETURNING CALLS LAST FRIDAY " so that would mean she walked to somewhere and was presumably safe overnight that night and Thurs to Friday would it not ? That is why her sister said on her FB page then that she went missing on FRIDAY .

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/family-says-shannon-madill-burgess-was-unlikely-to-disappear-without-contacting-anyone-1.2134851#ixzz3L8Vdi1T1


A

The officer does not say anything about returning calls on Friday. In response to a question at 3:58m the officer states that there has been no cell phone contact at all since she was last seen on Nov 27.

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

 

[otto]

If she was not home for all those days then there must have been arrangements at least about who would take care of the dog, so she must have told him she was planning on going away for a period of time, and if he could take care of the dog during that period, in that case he would not have known she was missing, but aware of her plans of not being home for some time.

If a friend was taking care of the dog then Shannon must have offered a reason for bringing the dog, and that person having been aware of her plans.

Somehow the dog situation would provide at least some answer, if she has just left the dog behind for days without a word, then JB must have thought this was not "as usual". IMO

Her husband most certainly would have noticed that he was the only person filling up the food and water bowls. That, and the fact that her cell phone was at home, tell us that her husband knew Shannon had not been at home for those five days. Is it normal for Shannon to abandon her dog and phone for five days? It doesn't sound like it.

If something happened to her at home, it would be fairly easy for the husband to avoid cameras by removing her from the home via the ground level exit on their townhouse.

 

[LoisLane]

Given that police have said that Shannon was last seen on Nov 27 at 12:30AM at her residence, and her cell phone is at her residence, doesn't that mean that social media banter about text and cell phone activity after that time is irrelevant?

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

I certainly do! Unless we should be considering the sister and father as suspects. Which I don't.

 

[LoisLane]

Could you please post the link to the statement that Shannon continued texting on her phone - the phone that was left at her home when she vanished late Wednesday night - well after she was last accounted for.

We have no proof that Shannon "vanished" late Wednesday night. She could have been at her house and the person who claims to have seen her was the one to leave her house. Shannon could have still used her phone after 12:30am and left her home at some other time.

 

[otto]

I certainly do! Unless we should be considering the sister and father as suspects. Which I don't.

Comments on social media are not statements of fact, they are banter between people that knew Shannon where they are trying to nail down a timeline, and figure out the last time that anyone heard from her. Snippets from that banter are not facts regarding her disappearance. The police statement contains facts regarding her disappearance.

Police stated that Shannon was last seen late Wednesday night: 12:30AM Nov 27. Police stated that there has been no activity on Shannon's cell phone since the time that she disappeared. Police have stated that she vanished, and her cell phone did not vanish. From the moment that she was last seen, until today, there has been no text or cell phone contact from Shannon. This information is contained in the Dec 5 police press statement that I linked in comment #942.

What is the upside of posting a social media remark from Dec 3, when the official statement was released on Dec 5? Why should we exclude the police statement and chase a social media remark that was made prior to the official police statement?

 

[otto]

We have no proof that Shannon "vanished" late Wednesday night. She could have been at her house and the person who claims to have seen her was the one to leave her house. Shannon could have still used her phone after 12:30am and left her home at some other time.

In fact, during the press conference held by police, it is stated that "Shannon left". Shannon was last seen at her home at 12:30AM Nov 27, and no one has seen her since that time. She simply vanished.

Police have said that there is no communication from Shannon via her cell phone since the time that she was last seen at her home.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Could you please post the link to the statement that Shannon continued texting on her phone - the phone that was left at her home when she vanished late Wednesday night - well after she was last accounted for.

Can you please post the link that says she vanished at 12:30am?

If they knew exactly *when* she vanished, that sure would then be easy to figure out how...

 

[otto]

This newsfeed suggests that Shannon was cast for the part after the audition in Edmonton:

"This is for the 8th Annual 100 Hour Film Race. We need an actress asap, as the actress cast to play the part is now missing. We are looking for a female mid 20's. The show must go on.... please spread the word. Thank you!

2 weeks ago"

http://www.socialhelpers.tv/news-feed/

 

[otto]

Can you please post the link that says she vanished at 12:30am?

If they knew exactly *when* she vanished, that sure would then be easy to figure out how...

In a suspicious disappearance of someone, there is absolutely no correlation between knowing when someone was last seen, and knowing how they vanished or what happened that caused them to vanish. She was last seen at her home at 12:30AM. From that moment on, no one has seen her. She simply vanished.

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

 

[LoisLane]

In fact, during the press conference held by police, it is stated that "Shannon left". Shannon was last seen at her home at 12:30AM Nov 27, and no one has seen her since that time. She simply vanished.

Police have said that there is no communication from Shannon via her cell phone since the time that she was last seen at her home.

I will take that with a grain-of-salt, especially if it was the estranged ex-husband that LE is relying on for an accurate timeline. In the FB banter the family did clarify the confusion of the texts and times. That would not have changed IMO and would have been relayed to the family by LE. JMO.

 

[otto]

I will take that with a grain-of-salt, especially if it was the estranged ex-husband that LE is relying on for an accurate timeline. In the FB banter the family did clarify the confusion of the texts and times. That would not have changed IMO and would have been relayed to the family by LE. JMO.

What difference does it make to the timeline if the estranged husband (not an ex-husband), with whom she lived, was responsible for her disappearance? According to him, she was alive and well at 12:30AM on Nov 27. He places her at home at that time. After that time either he, or someone else, most likely did something to her.

The social media banter is nothing more that people that knew Shannon trying to nail down the last time that they heard from her, or saw her. No one heard from her, or saw her, after 12:30AM late Wednesday per the police.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Comments on social media are not statements of fact, they are banter between people that knew Shannon where they are trying to nail down a timeline, and figure out the last time that anyone heard from her. Snippets from that banter are not facts regarding her disappearance. The police statement contains facts regarding her disappearance.

Police stated that Shannon was last seen late Wednesday night: 12:30AM Nov 27. Police stated that there has been no activity on Shannon's cell phone since the time that she disappeared. Police have stated that she vanished, and her cell phone did not vanish. From the moment that she was last seen, until today, there has been no text or cell phone contact from Shannon. This information is contained in the Dec 5 police press statement that I linked in comment #942.

What is the upside of posting a social media remark from Dec 3, when the official statement was released on Dec 5? Why should we exclude the police statement and chase a social media remark that was made prior to the official police statement?

But LE get their facts and statements for their timeline from somewhere - from technological records and witness statements. The witnesses here are JB and SB's family and friends. They provide when they last heard or saw of Shannon to LE and LE base that on what the phone records and other technological forensics say to create a timeline.

The comments on the FB were made by SB's father (I think DM is her dad) and he clarified what LE found on the cell records. So the FB banter and LE's press statements are saying the same thing and same times roughly, they're both relevant IMO.

 

[otto]

In the case of Edmonton born Nancy Cooper, she was last seen by friends shortly after midnight. The following morning, she was reported missing by friends. The husband reported that he saw her in the morning shortly before she went for a run. The husband was convicted of her murder, and the murder most likely occurred shortly after she returned home the night before. That does not change the timeline of the husband reporting that she was last seen in the morning. There was truth to that statement, as the theory is that he disposed of her body early that morning. According to her husband, she vanished during her morning run. According to her friends, she was murdered in her home and her husband made her disappear.

Did she vanish? Yes. Was the husband the last person to see her? Yes. Did he lie about when she was last seen alive and well? Yes. Did it make any difference in the investigation? No. He was still the last person to see her alive, and her murder occurred at some point between the time that she arrived at home, and the time that she was expected at her friend's house the following day. The same is true of Shannon. If her husband did something to her, it happened at some time between the time that she arrived at home and 12:30AM Nov 27. In Shannon's case, the husband has suggested that she went out in the middle of the night. In Nancy Cooper's case, the husband suggested that she went for a run in the early morning.

 

[otto]

But LE get their facts and statements for their timeline from somewhere - from technological records and witness statements. The witnesses here are JB and SB's family and friends. They provide when they last heard or saw of Shannon to LE and LE base that on what the phone records and other technological forensics say to create a timeline.

The comments on the FB were made by SB's father (I think DM is her dad) and he clarified what LE found on the cell records. So the FB banter and LE's press statements are saying the same thing and same times roughly, they're both relevant IMO.

The last eye-witness to see Shannon is her husband. He saw her at their home. The last phone record is available through the cell phone provider and has nothing to do with social media remarks. We can rely on police statements for facts ... no reason to creep social media pages.

 

[LoisLane]

What difference does it make to the timeline if the estranged husband (not an ex-husband), with whom she lived, was responsible for her disappearance? According to him, she was alive and well at 12:30AM on Nov 27. He places her at home at that time. After that time either he, or someone else, most likely did something to her.

The social media banter is nothing more that people that knew Shannon trying to nail down the last time that they heard from her, or saw her. No one heard from her, or saw her, after 12:30AM late Wednesday per the police.

It makes a big difference. LE needs a timeline to follow. If she left her home on her own later that morning to say catch a bus and know one who recognized her or could verify that detail then IMO the search would lead a different direction.

Maybe JB is scared out of his mind that he would be an immediate suspect and so he has chosen to leave out a few details regarding the couples last interaction.

 

[otto]

It makes a big difference. LE needs a timeline to follow. If she left her home on her own later that morning to say catch a bus and know one who recognized her or could verify that detail then IMO the search would lead a different direction.

Maybe JB is scared out of his mind that he would be an immediate suspect and so he has chosen to leave out a few details regarding the couples last interaction.

The only reason that someone would omit critical information regarding a missing person is if they are trying to interfere with the investigation. Obviously when someone is missing, facts surrounding the last known location are extremely important and there is no room for obfuscating the facts for self-interest.

According to the husband, everything was fine when they were last together. According to police, the husband has been completely cooperative.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

The last eye-witness to see Shannon is her husband. He saw her at their home. The last phone record is available through the cell phone provider and has nothing to do with social media remarks. We can rely on police statements for facts ... no reason to creep social media pages.

I will bet LE monitor and investigate social media for cases, there's tons of information on there. It's the wave of the future and a form of Big Brother where people expose and publicate their lives for (mostly) all to see.

The NYPD shooter posted and ranted on his Instagram before he assassinated those officers and the killer of the California university students posted his rants on YouTube. These are different types of crimes than this one obviously, but after the fact and during an investigation crucial information might be found on these sites to gain insight into suspects, victims, people's lifestyles and crimes.

 

[otto]

I will bet LE monitor and investigate social media for cases, there's tons of information on there. It's the wave of the future and a form of Big Brother where people expose and publicate their lives for (mostly) all to see.

The NYPD shooter posted and ranted on his Instagram before he assassinated those officers and the killer of the California university students posted his rants on YouTube. These are different types of crimes than this one obviously, but after the fact and during an investigation crucial information might be found on these sites to gain insight into suspects, victims, people's lifestyles and crimes.

Police stated during the press conference that they were looking at Shannon's electronic footprint, but that doesn't mean that social media comments will form the foundation for the facts of the case.

 

[LoisLane]

I will bet LE monitor and investigate social media for cases, there's tons of information on there. It's the wave of the future and a form of Big Brother where people expose and publicate their lives for (mostly) all to see.

The NYPD shooter posted and ranted on his Instagram before he assassinated those officers and the killer of the California university students posted his rants on YouTube. These are different types of crimes than this one obviously, but after the fact and during an investigation crucial information might be found on these sites to gain insight into suspects, victims, people's lifestyles and crimes.

It is definetly an avenue to explore and worth the LE's time to pursue. They would be remiss if they did not bother to check social media.