IL - Lt. Charles 'Joe' Gliniewicz, 52, found dead, Fox Lake, 1 Sep 2015 - #2

[DEPUTYDAWG]

Totally random thoughts as I'm skimming through recent posts (I haven't had the opportunity to read closely these past few days):

- As some are picking up on, he probably wasn't required at the station for 0745 roll call. Remember, he was a LT. Many have more consistent "office hours." I have NO IDEA what his agency required, and what LT's normal routine was, so I am stating this blindly for his specific case. So, don't feel bad correcting me if it's been stated what LT normally did, LOL. My Sheriff's Dept and State HP history reflects that LT's are in the office a lot. However, they are free to do traffic stops and other activities in their assigned patrol car if they see a need. (My former Major at the State HP was famous for conducting two traffic stops per month, so that the "supervisors" could justify to the State why supervisors still needed unmarked vehicles, LOL. To be fair, he also helped stranded motorists many times, when needed, and even helped with a fast food robbery one time, ha! But for the most part, they drive in to work and drive home, and don't hold to the strict start time as the shift patrol officers do.) In fact, it wouldn't surprise me that this LT in question may have had a reason to go by this area, for some criminial investigation. Don't know. He could have been trying to help. Or not.

I'm not strong on ambush or criminal act of 3 individuals towards LT, or suicide yet. I'll wait to hear/read more before getting on the fence.

Someone asked why he would be interested in another LE job if he was getting ready to retire. That is VERY common in the LE arena. Basically, if the officer still feels fit for duty, they can basically reep the financial rewards...get their PD retirement and some of the benefits, and then go work their "post retirement position" and get a second income coming in. Sweet deal for those who are still physically able to do it. Many officers started in their early 20's...get 30 years in, they're in their mid-50's with still a lot of work life ability ahead of them. I know many, many who have done that, and are doing that. (Some states even set it up for a state HP/Trooper to do that, they get hired back and can work for the same agency...getting a state retirement check every month, and then a check for working. They refer to that as double dipping, but at least in some states, it's legal. They have to be able to still pass the physical, however.

Reading to see what else transpires in this case........................................................................

 

[Chuz Life]

Ok, so here's my number one theory (at this moment, at least):

I think Lt was set up and then ambushed.

May I ask what evidence there is that you use to support that thought?

I think someone called him on his way to work and asked him to check out three suspicious males by the cement plant.

Again, what evidence do we have that supports that possibility?

He got there and radio'd in his location. He then saw 3 males running away towards the swamp (Maybe these 3 males were given money from someone to be there and then run away?).

Okay STOP. Are you suggesting that 'he' (the Lieutenant) was complicit in his own killing? Or, are you suggesting that the three suspects were actually there? Remember there were K9's from as many as 48 units and they were not able to detect any of them, track any of them, etc.

So, why would the Lt report suspects who were not actually there and if they were there, why were K9 units unable to find them - just minutes after they were "allegedly" reported?

As he was following them, the person who set him up then ambushed him and shot and killed him.

This theory will be destroyed if (when) it is determined that the officer was killed by his own weapon. Won't it?

The three men could have been local criminal-types who were paid to be there at that time. That could explain why they were then seen on surveillance video, and then cleared of having anything to do with the murder - because they were only in that area briefly, and before Lt was murdered.

Please explain how they prevented their scent from being detected by the K9 units at the scene of the officer's death.

 

[i.b.nora]

I am currently thinking that he was suffering from severe financial difficulties.

Had he gotten the Police Chief job in Antioch, he could have 'double-dipped', which seems not uncommon in Illinois. He could have collected his Police pension (contrary to others, I am guessing it was generous) and he could have collected a Police Chief salary at the same time.

If the local law enforcement is unwilling to investigate such angles, I imagine there are other lawyers and investigators for pension funds, insurance companies, etc. who might investigate. They should, imo.

 

[steelman]

The reason the investigators are mad at the coroner is because he is releasing information they could use if and when a perp is ever caught. Questions such as those below could be used to validate whether this person was actually there or not, and it is also information that only the cops and the perp himself would know.

1) What happened that morning when Officer Gliniewicz began to approach you ?

2) Was there a struggle between the two of you, and where did it happen exactly?

3) Did you shoot him ? How many times did you shoot him ? Who's gun did you shoot him with ?

4) How many shot did you fire ? How many shots hit him ? How close were you to him when you pulled the trigger ?

5) How did you manage to get hold of his gun ? Did your friends help you ambush him ?

6)Which way did you run after you shot him ? Where did you throw the gun you shot him with ?

7) Did you grab him by the arm, hand, neck, head, leg, etc ??........(For DNA matching )

8) What kind of shoes did you have on ? What about your friends, what were they wearing ?

9) How did you leave the scene, walking or driving ? What about your friends ? How did the three of you get there that morning ?



Every one of these questions are questions that the cops may know the answer to and the perp(s) would also know. The perps are the only ones that would know these answers for a fact. LE can match up his answers to verify if he was really there or not. If this information makes it out to the general public, than just about any clown out there could claim to be the shooter based on what he read in the newspaper.
It's that kind of information they fear will be leaked out by the coroner and "jeopardize" things for them.

I understand their frustration to some degree, but I also understand that completely shutting out the public is a huge mistake. All that does is fuel rampant speculation of exactly the kind we are seeing here. They should and could release certain information that would help shore up the public's confidence that this story actually happened the way it was told in the beginning. For instance, just step forward and say "We have undeniable PROOF there were three unidentified persons at the scene with Gliniewicz that morning." Period. They really don't need to offer much more than that, and could still retain plenty of "secret evidence" for their interrogation process.

That statement in itself would be good enough for most people. LE won't do that though, which is the entire problem. There are many things they could tell the public in order to dampen speculation and stop the rumors, but for some reason they have chosen not to. Due to this information "blackout", the public is feeling as though they are being lied to and shunned, and apparently so is the coroner himself.

If they have absolutely no proof that these three people ever existed, then that is going to be a whole different ball game. Personally, I think they probably do, but any and all information pertinent to that evidence is being withheld, even from the coroner.

It's a swampy area. What's in a swamp ? Mud, sand, dirt. If you have three sets of footprints at the scene besides Gliniewicz, then release that information. It wouldn't jeopardize anything, and it would go a long way in shutting up all the armchair detectives.

 

[Chuz Life]

No I totally agree that there is zero evidence that supports what he reported.

Thank you.

And here's my question- what scent were the k9s tracking? They don't just sniff at the ground- they are trained to detect very specific scent based on a sample. e.g. If they are searching for a missing child, they are using a sample obtained from parents (clothing, etc) to search.Sent from my not so humble opinion.

Dogs are often trained to do both. Track a specific scent from an article as you suggested and also to track the high amonia content released by a person in stress. This was covered in depth on the show "MythBusters" when they explored ways to mask a person's scent.

Also consider this: "The Tracking Dog or The Trailing Dog

A true foot step tracking dog follows “ground disturbance odor” in vegetation and/or dirt sedimentation from the track start to the location of victim. They are not trained to locate and identify human scent but rather the odor created when the human foot disturbs the ground surface."

http://www.prsar.org/types-of-sar-dogs.html

 

[PandaJ]

May I ask what evidence there is that you use to support that thought?



Again, what evidence do we have that supports that possibility?



Okay STOP. Are you suggesting that 'he' (the Lieutenant) was complicit in his own killing? Or, are you suggesting that the three suspects were actually there? Remember there were K9's from as many as 48 units and they were not able to detect any of them, track any of them, etc.

So, why would the Lt report suspects who were not actually there and if they were there, why were K9 units unable to find them - just minutes after they were "allegedly" reported?



This theory will be destroyed if (when) it is determined that the officer was killed by his own weapon. Won't it?



Please explain how they prevented their scent from being detected by the K9 units at the scene of the officer's death.

It's just my THEORY so I don't have actual evidence to support it, obviously. None of us do at this point, because they aren't releasing too much to go off of. It's just the theory that makes the most sense to me, in my mind.

I am absolutely NOT suggesting that Lt was complicit in his own killing. I am suggesting that maybe there WERE 3 males who were in that area; they just did not partake in the murder. As for why they weren't tracked by dogs, I don't think we have enough info about the dogs to say why - what exactly were the dogs tracking? Just because dogs didn't pick up a scent (and who knows what scent they were looking for), doesn't necessarily (in my opinion) mean 100% that there wasn't anyone else there.

If it's determined his own gun was used, there still could have been a struggle. That doesn't necessarily 100% point to suicide either.

For me, my first theory is that it was a set up and he was murdered. After that, I haven't been able to rule out suicide either.

jmo

 

[Chuz Life]

It's just my THEORY so I don't have actual evidence to support it, obviously. None of us do at this point, because they aren't releasing too much to go off of. It's just the theory that makes the most sense to me, in my mind.

I am absolutely NOT suggesting that Lt was complicit in his own killing. I am suggesting that maybe there WERE 3 males who were in that area; they just did not partake in the murder. As for why they weren't tracked by dogs, I don't think we have enough info about the dogs to say why - what exactly were the dogs tracking? Just because dogs didn't pick up a scent (and who knows what scent they were looking for), doesn't necessarily (in my opinion) mean 100% that there wasn't anyone else there.

If it's determined his own gun was used, there still could have been a struggle. That doesn't necessarily 100% point to suicide either.

For me, my first theory is that it was a set up and he was murdered. After that, I haven't been able to rule out suicide either.

jmo

If there was a struggle and he was shot with his own gun,... that kind of rules out a planned 'HIT.'

Doesn't it?

 

[bluesneakers]

If there was a struggle and he was shot with his own gun,... that kind of rules out a planned 'HIT.'

Doesn't it?

Not necessarily. Things might not have gone according to plan.

 

[PandaJ]

If there was a struggle and he was shot with his own gun,... that kind of rules out a planned 'HIT.'

Doesn't it?

I don't think it does. Someone still could have approached him and they could have struggled over the gun. But again, that's IF he was shot with his own gun, which has not been confirmed yet.

jmo

 

[katydid23]

May I ask what evidence there is that you use to support that thought?



Again, what evidence do we have that supports that possibility?



Okay STOP. Are you suggesting that 'he' (the Lieutenant) was complicit in his own killing? Or, are you suggesting that the three suspects were actually there? Remember there were K9's from as many as 48 units and they were not able to detect any of them, track any of them, etc.

So, why would the Lt report suspects who were not actually there and if they were there, why were K9 units unable to find them - just minutes after they were "allegedly" reported?



This theory will be destroyed if (when) it is determined that the officer was killed by his own weapon. Won't it?



Please explain how they prevented their scent from being detected by the K9 units at the scene of the officer's death.

BBM

Are we certain that the dogs were 'prevented from picking up any scents?' I have not seen that reported. They did not lead their handlers to anyone hiding in a crawlspace or anything. But I don't think we know if they hit on any scents or not.

 

[Chuz Life]

(face palm)

Okay. I have to go to my real job now.

Of course, it's when I have several points that I wanted to address.

 

[leah]

I'm having trouble with suicide, but then someone makes a comment supporting that, and it makes me stop and consider it. So how would that go down? CG, driving to work/or already on patrol, decides today is the day I'm going to take my life, sees three random men walking, and decides to use them as part of his plans? He was very well liked and respected, so it is kind of hard to think he would try to point his finger at three innocent men? But at the same time, there were the three men he described and they have been cleared, what are the chances of a group of three men in that same area as he described, besides the three that are cleared? Did CG feel that he could pin it on them, knowing they would be cleared? Was there anything in his background to show he would think and act on such a scheme? The more I'm thinking and randomly writing this stuff down, the more it seems like this wasn't a suicide, but, I also don't think there were the three men, and just can't imagine this was accidental. I really enjoy reading all the thoughts on here, well thought out thoughts. But with all of these ideas, I'm more confused than ever.

 

[i.b.nora]

How often did Lt Gliniewiscz take his patrol vehicle home overnight?

Did he need it so he could call Dispatch in the morning?

 

[vestigare]

They don't have to mess around with the times in order for him to 'be on duty.' If he was in uniform, driving the patrol car, towards the station to begin his shift then he was on duty. JMO

I understand cops think they are always on duty but speaking from the standpoint of the insurers it would matter whether he was on legitimate duty or not and it is possible they just wanted to make sure there was no problem with the insurance questioning the time of the incident in relation to his official on duty status.

The PD doesn't get to decide how the insurer pays out. There are a lot of hoops to jump through in these cases.

If he started at 7:45 that means he was officially on duty when he spotted the individuals and began the incident that resulted in his death. Whether the death happened after his supposed 8:00 start time they originally suggested or not.

 

[PandaJ]

I'm having trouble with suicide, but then someone makes a comment supporting that, and it makes me stop and consider it. So how would that go down? CG, driving to work/or already on patrol, decides today is the day I'm going to take my life, sees three random men walking, and decides to use them as part of his plans? He was very well liked and respected, so it is kind of hard to think he would try to point his finger at three innocent men? But at the same time, there were the three men he described and they have been cleared, what are the chances of a group of three men in that same area as he described, besides the three that are cleared? Did CG feel that he could pin it on them, knowing they would be cleared? Was there anything in his background to show he would think and act on such a scheme? The more I'm thinking and randomly writing this stuff down, the more it seems like this wasn't a suicide, but, I also don't think there were the three men, and just can't imagine this was accidental. I really enjoy reading all the thoughts on here, well thought out thoughts. But with all of these ideas, I'm more confused than ever.

I feel you. I also have no idea how the three men would fit into the suicide theory. If police hadn't said that there WERE three men on video whom they cleared, I could then maybe think suicide was more likely. Like if the three men never existed at all and he just made them up. But three men DID exist, at least according to police. It's just unclear whether the three men were really the perpetrators or not.

I have a hard time believing that Lt would commit suicide and then pin it on someone else. I just don't get the impression from everything we've heard about him that he would do that sort of thing to someone else.

jmo

 

[Elley Mae]

According to someone here they worked 12 hours shifts in 2013. still reading.

http://www.indeed.com/cmp/Lake-County-Sheriff's-Office/reviews?fcountry=US

 

[potaco]

I may have missed it, but do we know where and when the 3 men were spotted on video? If they were in the same area around the same time as the shooting, that could feed into some of the theories, but if they were in a different area at a different time, it's obviously less likely. "Two white males, one black male" might seem like it "has to be" referring to the same group caught on camera, though there is no mention of clothing, age, height, or really any other descriptives that would really help to confirm.

 

[vestigare]

I feel you. I also have no idea how the three men would fit into the suicide theory. If police hadn't said that there WERE three men on video whom they cleared, I could then maybe think suicide was more likely. Like if the three men never existed at all and he just made them up. But three men DID exist, at least according to police. It's just unclear whether the three men were really the perpetrators or not.

I have a hard time believing that Lt would commit suicide and then pin it on someone else. I just don't get the impression from everything we've heard about him that he would do that sort of thing to someone else.

jmo

It is possible that he understood the demographics of the area and If he committed suicide he obviously thought this out but could never know how others would react nor know that his vague description of a statistical improbability in that area would actually point to real people who had nothing to do with this.

We also have no indication this trio was ever anywhere near the scene. They may have been questioned only because they stood out as bei n g two white, one black walking around town that morning. They may been video taped on the.compete other side of town at 8:00 so never were seen by Gliniewicz.

 

[KristinSchmistin]

The alleged "suspects" were on foot.

Can you explain why police trained K9's from as many as 48 agencies were not able to pick up on their scent? Why no footprints or other evidence has been found? Why they were not spotted (within minutes) by the flood of officers and helicopters?

There was nothing detected by k9 officers because there was no scent to detect. Water does effect things drastically - up to eliminating detectable scent.

Do we know for sure there were or weren't foot prints? Was it even a surface that would show shoe prints (hard surface versus mud or dirt? And if it was a surface that was capable of showing prints- were the visible prints even from a suspect versus anyone in the general public who had walked around that area recently?

DNA evidence other than the victim was found at the scene and is now being analyzed by BOTH a state lab and federal lab. They should have results shortly.


Sent from my not so humble opinion.

 

[cady]

I feel you. I also have no idea how the three men would fit into the suicide theory. If police hadn't said that there WERE three men on video whom they cleared, I could then maybe think suicide was more likely. Like if the three men never existed at all and he just made them up. But three men DID exist, at least according to police. It's just unclear whether the three men were really the perpetrators or not.

I have a hard time believing that Lt would commit suicide and then pin it on someone else. I just don't get the impression from everything we've heard about him that he would do that sort of thing to someone else.

jmo

If it was a suicide, perhaps the 3 people did not exist. The 3 that were seen on various videos were cleared. I doubt that they would have been cleared so soon, if they were known to have been near the crime scene. They were cleared by receipts and times, I believe. So,we need another group of three,( 2 white one black) where there is evidence of them being there, or the 3 people story does not ring true. It's NOT 3 people and a suicide, THAT doesn't pass the smell test. JMO