Found Deceased Canada - Shannon Burgess, 25, Calgary, 26 Nov 2014 - #3 *Arrest*

[evafiore]

As well as searching in bins/freezers etc. That is in the different ball game then a walk through as well.

I'm still not clear on that, but everything I've found suggests that a warrant is a substitute for consent in Canada. Maybe JB truly co-operated, as they said he did?

 

[debsy99]

I'm still not clear on that, but everything I've found suggests that a warrant is a substitute for consent in Canada. Maybe JB truly co-operated, as they said he did?

I'm not saying they didn't. I said I wish it was standard and police could automatically go through a house with a K-9 to check when a person is reported last seen at their home.

 

[news.talk]

As well as searching in bins/freezers etc. That is in the different ball game then a walk through as well.

It also goes back to police resources... Every time each officer goes from point A to point B, they have to file a report and code it. They have to justify the use of each officer's time and reason for being there. They cannot call out forensics or K-9 without justification. That is using another unit's budget for their investigation... It all has to be warranted. Unless the Investigator's find probable cause, they cannot call in another unit. They just don't work that way anymore. It certainly is nothing like we see on TV crime dramas where half the Police force is involved in every investigation.

 

[evafiore]

It also goes back to police resources... Every time each officer goes from point A to point B, they have to file a report and code it. They have to justify the use of each officer's time and reason for being there. They cannot call out forensics or K-9 without justification. That is using another unit's budget for their investigation... It all has to be warranted. Unless the Investigator's find probable cause, they cannot call in another unit. They just don't work that way anymore. It certainly is nothing like we see on TV crime dramas where half the Police force is involved in every investigation.

...and in some ways, they could also save time and precious resources by just asking for consent rather than applying for a warrant...

I'm not entirely convinced that they would apply for a warrant if they can get consent.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I'm still not clear on that, but everything I've found suggests that a warrant is a substitute for consent in Canada. Maybe JB truly co-operated, as they said he did?

Hypothetical: And if he was involved and felt he could outsmart LE like many criminals think they do, maybe he did co-operate. That way, if he lets them in, then they might not attempt to seek a warrant (where they need grounds and perhaps might get to dig deeper).

 

[news.talk]

In a typical ITO - Information to Obtain a Warrant, the scope has to be laid out with justification:

A search warrant can be used not only for collecting evidence supporting a criminal charge but also as an investigative tool for alleged criminal activity.

The items sought need not necessarily afford evidence of the actual commission of the offence under investigation. Rather it "must be something either taken by itself or in relation to other things, that could be reasonably believed to be evidence of the commission of the crime."

Generally, an approving justice should be satified that:

that the items specified exist; that the items specified will be found in the place to be searched at the time of the search; that the offence alleged has been, or will be, (depending on the type of search warrant being sought) committed; that the items specified will afford evidence of the offence alleged; and that the place to be searched is the location where the items will be located.

There are five basic questions that all ITO's must address at a minimum:

What are the grounds for believing the things to be searched for exist? What are the grounds for saying that the things to be searched for are at the place to be searched? What are the grounds for saying the offence has been committed as described? How will the things to be searched for afford evidence of the commission of the offence alleged? What are the grounds for saying that the place to be searched is at the location identified?

The justice of the peace loses jurisdiction where the description is over-broad or too vague such that it essentially allows the officer to conduct a "carte blanche" search for any evidence within the premises.

It has been recommended the following principles be considered:

Peace officers should be given some latitude in describing things as they are still at the investigative stage; the description may be limited to classes of documents if it is sufficiently limited to the crime for which they are alleged to afford evidence; the Information sworn to obtain the Search Warrant must be read together with the Search Warrant; the nature of the offence(s) must be considered; in considering all of the factors, appropriate inferences may be made; *there need not always be a time limit set out with respect to the documents or items sought*; overly broad or vague descriptions can be severed leaving validly described things remaining; each case must be considered on its own facts.

http://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cana..._Practice/Search_and_Seizure/Warrant_Searches

 

[Lalalacasbah]

I'm not saying they didn't. I said I wish it was standard and police could automatically go through a house with a K-9 to check when a person is reported last seen at their home.

That would be great one day if they could do that if red tape and budgets weren't involved, it would be progressive.

I read that in Hamilton, Ont., they are now implementing that a mental health professional accompany police to some calls, which is fantastic. I don't know the full story or details yet, but I believe this will be beneficial and help for certain situations.

 

[evafiore]

In a typical ITO - Information to Obtain a Warrant, the scope has to be laid out with justification:

A search warrant can be used not only for collecting evidence supporting a criminal charge but also as an investigative tool for alleged criminal activity.

The items sought need not necessarily afford evidence of the actual commission of the offence under investigation. Rather it "must be something either taken by itself or in relation to other things, that could be reasonably believed to be evidence of the commission of the crime."

Generally, an approving justice should be satified that:

that the items specified exist; that the items specified will be found in the place to be searched at the time of the search; that the offence alleged has been, or will be, (depending on the type of search warrant being sought) committed; that the items specified will afford evidence of the offence alleged; and that the place to be searched is the location where the items will be located.

There are five basic questions that all ITO's must address at a minimum:

What are the grounds for believing the things to be searched for exist? What are the grounds for saying that the things to be searched for are at the place to be searched? What are the grounds for saying the offence has been committed as described? How will the things to be searched for afford evidence of the commission of the offence alleged? What are the grounds for saying that the place to be searched is at the location identified?

The justice of the peace loses jurisdiction where the description is over-broad or too vague such that it essentially allows the officer to conduct a "carte blanche" search for any evidence within the premises.

It has been recommended the following principles be considered:

Peace officers should be given some latitude in describing things as they are still at the investigative stage; the description may be limited to classes of documents if it is sufficiently limited to the crime for which they are alleged to afford evidence; the Information sworn to obtain the Search Warrant must be read together with the Search Warrant; the nature of the offence(s) must be considered; in considering all of the factors, appropriate inferences may be made; *there need not always be a time limit set out with respect to the documents or items sought*; overly broad or vague descriptions can be severed leaving validly described things remaining; each case must be considered on its own facts.

http://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cana..._Practice/Search_and_Seizure/Warrant_Searches

Yes...and all of this can be avoided if they get consent. This outlines what is required for a warrant, not what is required when asking for consent.

 

[news.talk]

...and in some ways, they could also save time and precious resources by just asking for consent rather than applying for a warrant...

I'm not entirely convinced that they would apply for a warrant if they can get consent.

Consent can and has been frequently tossed out in court. It becomes a question of he said he said... If e evidence is found, the person can easily say, "I didn't give you permission to search there" - When it comes to LE doing their jobs, they ere on the side of caution and get a warrant. They wouldn't have jobs very long if they didn't.

 

[evafiore]

Consent can and has been frequently tossed out in court. It becomes a question of he said he said... If e evidence is found, the person can easily say, "I didn't give you permission to search there" - When it comes to LE doing their jobs, they ere on the side of caution and get a warrant. They wouldn't have jobs very long if they didn't.

:thinking: Perhaps. Though I don't think it's at all impossible that they did investigate with his consent (asked for very carefully, on record). Or maybe there was a warrant that the media hasn't caught on to. For whatever reason, the case has apparently gone cold in a matter of a few months.

Lala did bring up a good point. If he were completely cooperative, it may be to deter LE from digging further. Or he really has nothing to hide and SB left on her own accord.

 

[news.talk]

Yes...and all of this can be avoided if they get consent. This outlines what is required for a warrant, not what is required when asking for consent.

The police will provide a consent form to be signed, which says that you've been told: (1) you don't have to consent, (2) that you can withdraw your consent at any time, and (3) anything found during the search can later be used against you as evidence in court.

----

The cases are divided on whether the police need to give clear instructions on the right to refuse. In R v Rutten 2006 SKCA 17 at 39 to 44, the court stated that permission to enter to search a dwelling must include information on the person's right to refuse. While elsewhere it is said that the standard of informed consent is less than the informational component of s. 10(b). The police need not tell the accused of the right to refuse consent. However, a failure to do so may result in a lack of informed consent.

The Crown must establish that the accused right to be searched was waived clearly and unequivocally.[7]*However, where the accused is given access to counsel there is a presumption of informed consent unless the accused shows otherwise.

Consent to enter a home does not include a blanket right to search the whole house including the basement.

http://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cana...d_Seizure/Warrantless_Searches/Consent_Search

If you look at the case law, the laws on consent are murky and can and have been challenged. Police Officer's are told to *always* get a warrant if there is any indication that evidence will be recovered.

 

[news.talk]

:thinking: Perhaps. Though I don't think it's at all impossible that they did investigate with his consent (asked for very carefully, on record). Or maybe there was a warrant that the media hasn't caught on to. For whatever reason, the case has apparently gone cold in a matter of a few months.

Lala did bring up a good point. If he were completely cooperative, it may be to deter LE from digging further. Or he really has nothing to hide and SB left on her own accord.

My suspicion, is that if there was a homicide, it did not occur at her home. We only have JB's word that she arrived back in Calgary. As discussed upthread, her phone was found at the residence, which could have been used by 'someone' else to post to FB.

 

[evafiore]

The police will provide a consent form to be signed, which says that you've been told: (1) you don't have to consent, (2) that you can withdraw your consent at any time, and (3) anything found during the search can later be used against you as evidence in court.

----

The cases are divided on whether the police need to give clear instructions on the right to refuse. In R v Rutten 2006 SKCA 17 at 39 to 44, the court stated that permission to enter to search a dwelling must include information on the person's right to refuse. While elsewhere it is said that the standard of informed consent is less than the informational component of s. 10(b). The police need not tell the accused of the right to refuse consent. However, a failure to do so may result in a lack of informed consent.

The Crown must establish that the accused right to be searched was waived clearly and unequivocally.[7]*However, where the accused is given access to counsel there is a presumption of informed consent unless the accused shows otherwise.

Consent to enter a home does not include a blanket right to search the whole house including the basement.

http://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cana...d_Seizure/Warrantless_Searches/Consent_Search

If you look at the case law, the laws on consent are murky and can and have been challenged. Police Officer's are told to *always* get a warrant if there is any indication that evidence will be recovered.

I'd bet that he had access to counsel.

I don't doubt that JB could be guilty. Though I'd say it's equally possible that SB's left on her own. Either possibility could explain the silence and seemingly passive attitude of the family and LE.

 

[news.talk]

I'd bet that he had access to counsel.

I don't doubt that JB could be guilty. Though I'd say it's equally possible that SB's left on her own. Either possibility could explain the silence and seemingly passive attitude of the family and LE.

In all the missing persons cases that I have covered, the only time that I have ever seen a hush fall over a case, is when a criminal case is being investigated. Often families are asked to keep off social-media and not speak to media, if a suspect is being investigated. Given that this family has ties to LE, they would be especially cooperative with this request.

If you download the missing women's inquiry protocol pdf, it will show the proceedures they must follow for all cases, even if there is a suspicion that the person has left voluntarily. They also go into detail about the reforms that need to be applied. Until a person is found, by way of LE ensuring they are safe, they must treat the Investigation as involuntary.

 

[Leischa]

The fact that Shannon's body wasn't recovered (that we know of) could be slowing down the investigation. Maybe JB did cooperate fully at the beginning but, you know, if all they did was go inside the residence and seize her phone, look through her stuff quickly and didn't notice anything suspect, then it could've been a way for him to clear his name for a while so LE would look in every other direction afterwards. He would've had time to properly cover the crime while LE was busy asking questions to other family members and friends. JMO

 

[evafiore]

One other factor that's been bothering me, since the beginning, is the fact that JB has been regularly accessing his dating profile. I'm not sure what to think of it---either his conscience is clear, and he has no qualms about trawling for hooks ups while his wife has left voluntarily; he's trying to appear as though his conscience is clear after committing a crime; or he's just clueless and doesn't care about how it appears, guilty or not.

Not a major point on its own, and perhaps even insignificant, but if we consider the fact that her family was going on tropical vacations and attending Superbowl parties one to two months after possibly losing a family member to violent crime, and ALL family, friends and acquaintances have stopped posting anything about SB, all at once, there's just something very strange about this case that sets it apart from other missing person investigations that have grown silent. Did LE ask everyone connected to her to stop posting? Is it part of a ruse to get the perp to surface because he feels safe, or are they really that unconcerned?

 

[debsy99]

One other factor that's been bothering me, since the beginning, is the fact that JB has been regularly accessing his dating profile. I'm not sure what to think of it---either his conscience is clear, and he has no qualms about trawling for hooks ups while his wife has left voluntarily; he's trying to appear as though his conscience is clear after committing a crime; or he's just clueless and doesn't care about how it appears, guilty or not.

Not a major point on its own, and perhaps even insignificant, but if we consider the fact that her family was going on tropical vacations and attending Superbowl parties one to two months after possibly losing a family member to violent crime, and ALL family, friends and acquaintances have stopped posting anything about SB, all at once, there's just something very strange about this case that sets it apart from other missing person investigations that have grown silent. Did LE ask everyone connected to her to stop posting? Is it part of a ruse to get the perp to surface because he feels safe, or are they really that unconcerned?

Friends/acquaintances have been posting on SB's page as recent as April 9th. It's the family that's silent.

 

[evafiore]

Friends/acquaintances have been posting on SB's page as recent as April 9th. It's the family that's silent.

...that's interesting. What types of messages are they posting? I can't see them as I don't have any mutual friends.

In stating that friends and acquaintances have not posted, I was referring to postings about SB directed at the public, seeking assistance in finding her. Have you noticed anything like that in the last few months?

 

[debsy99]

Oh that must be why I can see. There are tons from friends/acquaintances that say miss you, merry Christmas, I had a dream we found you, hope you come home. Etc. But not a word from family. Not even commenting on any of those posts. And no public posts from family or LE. But if LE is building another case it would be left as a missing person with no leads in the mean time.

 

[evafiore]

Oh that must be why I can see. There are tons from friends/acquaintances that say miss you, merry Christmas, I had a dream we found you, hope you come home. Etc. But not a word from family. Not even commenting on any of those posts. And no public posts from family or LE. But if LE is building another case it would be left as a missing person with no leads in the mean time.

So anything that is being posted is addressed to Shannon, and not to the public in hopes of obtaining information or assistance in locating her...?

:thinking: