IL - Lt. Charles 'Joe' Gliniewicz, 52, found dead, Fox Lake, 1 Sep 2015 - #4

[Chuz Life]

I have a question. Looking for feedback.

Let's throw a few scenarios based on the information we know.

We know his weapon was recovered on the scene.

What would be your thoughts on manner of death if we were able to reference how far away and location of where his weapon was found? Based on the locations of his wounds.

Scenario One: 1 foot from his head (using theory he was found face down)
Scenario Two: 2 feet from his head (using theory he was found face down)
Scenario Three: 3 feet from his head (using theory he was found face down)
Scenario Four: 4 feet from his head (using theory he was found face down)

Would any of the four scenarios in the distances given, make any difference to any particular theories?

I'm not sure I understand this question since(according to reports) he was not shot in the head. He was shot in the upper torso which may or may not have given him just a short amount of time to (voluntarily or involuntarily) move.

 

[Walker007]

I'm not sure I understand this question since(according to reports) he was not shot in the head. He was shot in the upper torso which may or may not have given him just a short amount of time to (voluntarily or involuntarily) move.

Doesn't matter where he was shot. I am asking if any of those were the locations the weapon was found based on the knowledge of where his entry wounds were. What would be your thoughts? Does it alter anything between suicide and homicide for anyone?

EDIT TO ADD: Where would the weapon be found in a likely suicide? How far away could it travel away from the body and in which direction away from the body based on what we know? We know if it is a homicide, it could be virtually anywhere on the scene.

 

[Chuz Life]

I understand why Rudd used the "S" word, as part of saying in effect that in light of the knowledge he had, all options were on the table .Unfortunately this occurred relatively early in the family's grieving process and many MSM sources did not communicate Rudd's statement objectively, they disproportionately emphasized the suicide angle opening the floodgates of bitter cynicism that may always be counted on from the cheap seats.

I think Melodie Gliniewicz is deserving of our understanding.

Rudd is not the only one keeping the possibility of this being a suicide on the table.

LE (Filenko) is doing the same.

Are you accusing him of being in the cheap seats too?

 

[Cubby]

So at this point is all we have left right now is a waiting game to see what (if any) information is released in regards to the ballistics/testing the and mapping the probable trajectory of both shots along with additional information about whether any prints/DNA were found on the gun other than CG's? I'm trying to invent some scenarios that *aren't* suicide, but without any info that could help do so (what were the signs of struggle, where/how was the body found/why was the gun thought to be missing/what was the exact timeline) I'm stuck.

I think if there were prints on the gun that didn't belong to CG that would have been released by now.

 

[Japple]

Theoretically possible BUT in this case the known facts paint a different picture:
1) the shell casings from the 2 shots were 100 feet apart so your scenario is very unlikely
2) the bullet from the fatal shot was recovered from Lt G's body. The bullet from the shot to the vest was not recovered, thus it was a glancing shot. If you watched the video earlier that demonstrated a 40 caliber direct impact you will notice that the bullet is embedded in the vest and recovered. Even this direct impact was clearly not "incapacitating". If Felinko claims the impact was like a sledgehammer, the autopsy results would substantiate this so he could easily verify his claim by releasing the section of the report upon which he based his statement.
3) both shots had a trajectory and proximity consistent with self infliction or else suicide would have been ruled out. I have a hard time picturing both shots being fired by another person and still meeting this criteria.
4) you describe a life & death struggle yet it took LE a month before they finally offer vaugue statements claiming that there were "signs of a struggle" but offer no further details.
5) gun powder residue patterns would be significantly different in suicide vs any other scenario. Hopefully they conducted these more sophisticated and discerning tests(especially since they took so long and required special labs and equipment!) rather than a simple swab to determine present or not present.

1) came from unnamed source.
2) I didn't hear that the vest bullet wasn't recovered. did I misssomething? I guess we'll have to wait to see what the autopsy says about the force of impact. Right now all we have is felincos statement.
4)It took them a month to release that info. but the documentation of the evidence of struggle would be from day 1. Does anybody think they just made this up weeks later?
5) agree 100%

everything they've released has been vague. And I hope for good reason. That said, I'm as anxious as anyone to see the extent of evidence they have. Problem for us is that we don't have all the known facts. Then you have media printing nameless quotes and dramatizing what little information they do have.

 

[Chuz Life]

Doesn't matter where he was shot. I am asking if any of those were the locations the weapon was found based on the knowledge of where his entry wounds were. What would be your thoughts? Does it alter anything between suicide and homicide for anyone?

Without knowing where the gun was actually found, the position his body was in and whether or not he moved after the shot? It is impossible to answer your question in a way that would be supported by that information.(assuming they are ever going to release those facts)

EDIT TO ADD: Where would the weapon be found in a likely suicide? How far away could it travel away from the body and in which direction away from the body based on what we know?

See above. It would depend on a LOT of (presently unknown) factors.

We know if it is a homicide, it could be virtually anywhere on the scene.

True and within reason, the same could be said if it was a suicide.

The more critical distance to be accounted for is "how far away was the gun from the Lt's body when it was fired?" If that distance was three feet or more then we could safely say that this was not a suicide.

 

[Walker007]

Without knowing where the gun was actually found, the position his body was in and whether or not he moved after the shot? It is impossible to answer your question in a way that would be supported by that information.(assuming they are ever going to release those facts)



See above. It would depend on a LOT of (presently unknown) factors.



True and within reason, the same could be said if it was a suicide

The more critical distance to be accounted for is "how far away was the gun from the Lt's body when it was fired?" If that distance was three feet or more then we could safely say that this was not a suicide.

Appreciate the response. I know we don't have all of those questions answered right now. Just trying to garner a scenario based on what we do know mixed with some possible scenarios. The ones I posted above. I agree with you that knowing the distance the shots were fired from would be key. I think it was in close enough range which plays a part in leaving all the options on the table. I also feel the weapon would have to be far enough away from the body to continue to the unknown circumstance that has been posed.

 

[Chuz Life]

I agree with you that knowing the distance the shots were fired from would be key. I think it was in close enough range which plays a part in leaving all the options on the table.

Agreed

I also feel the weapon would have to be far enough away from the body to continue to the unknown circumstance that has been posed.

I don't / can't agree on that. That is, not until we have more information about the shot, what was hit and how much time (if any) the Lt had to move or maybe even toss the gun away.

The reports say that the gun was found near his body. I doubt it was more than a few feet away from him at the most.

 

[night train]

I understand why Rudd used the* "S" word, as part of saying in effect that in light of the knowledge he had, all options were on the table .Unfortunately this occurred relatively early in the family's grieving process and many MSM sources did not communicate Rudd's statement objectively, they disproportionately emphasized the suicide angle opening the floodgates of bitter cynicism that may always be counted on from the cheap seats.

I think Melodie Gliniewicz is deserving of our understanding.

Rudd is not the only one keeping the possibility of this being a suicide on the table.

LE (Filenko) is doing the same.

Are you accusing him of being in the cheap seats too?

No, Filenko has the best seat in the house,he said everything's on the table. I'm in the cheap seats right there with you and many others in these threads and in the comments section of dozens of MSM articles.

I don't think the view from here offers enough clarity to meet the threshold necessary to push the suicide narrative as assertively as many have done.

 

[cady]

Isn't Filenko the same person who said that he did not know what deer trails look like, because he is a city boy? JMO

 

[vestigare]

Doesn't matter where he was shot. I am asking if any of those were the locations the weapon was found based on the knowledge of where his entry wounds were. What would be your thoughts? Does it alter anything between suicide and homicide for anyone?

EDIT TO ADD: Where would the weapon be found in a likely suicide? How far away could it travel away from the body and in which direction away from the body based on what we know? We know if it is a homicide, it could be virtually anywhere on the scene.

Without even understanding how the first officer thought the gun was missing it hard for me to even understand where the gun was or even if the Task force knows exactly where it was in relation to his body.
I hope they have crime scene photos before they moved him and his gun but I just don't know.

The gun in your scenarios could drop a great many places. We don't know if he was standing when shot or on his knees. We don't know if was holding the gun with one hand or two. Was he holding it in a standard grip or altered so he could shoot at a different angle. Did the gun stay in his hand while he hit the ground or did he drop it after the shot but before he hit the ground. Did it bounce. Did he reflexively put his hands out to stop his forward fall while holding the gun.

So without knowing anything about the location of the gun it is understandable in a suicide the gun could be found under the body or up to several feet away from the body assuming someone responding to the scene secured the location of gun and body.

 

[vestigare]

No, Filenko has the best seat in the house,he said everything's on the table. I'm in the cheap seats right there with you and many others in these threads and in the comments section of dozens of MSM articles.

I don't think the view from here offers enough clarity to meet the threshold necessary to push the suicide narrative as assertively as many have done.

So why even have a discussion because those with the homicide theory have the exact same evidence as those with the suicide theory in this case?

I don't think anyone is pushing anything here. Some of us are logically pointing out how pieces of evidence do not in fact prove homicide. The Task force had even admitted this.

We are in deep trouble when we unquestioningly believe every piece of evidence provided by LE and prosecutors contrary to common sense, logic and our own knowledge. I know we don't have every thing. Rarely do you get everything even in court. Clearly the task force also doesn't have everything but what they do have clearly points to suicide.

 

[night train]

So why even have a discussion because those with the homicide theory have the exact same evidence as those with the suicide theory in this case?

Information from unidentified sources and unsubstantiated assertions of racism are clearly not evidence,nor do they contribute to an objective discussion,yet both have surfaced repeatedly.

I don't think anyone is pushing anything here. Some of us are logically pointing out how pieces of evidence do not in fact prove homicide. The Task force had even admitted this.

Somebody's pushing something,please see the conclusion of the
statement below:

We are in deep trouble when we unquestioningly believe every piece of evidence provided by LE and prosecutors contrary to common sense, logic and our own knowledge. I know we don't have every thing. Rarely do you get everything even in court. Clearly the task force also doesn't have everything but what they do have clearly points to suicide.

 

[cady]

OT A great example of a great cop is Chief Longo of the Charlottesville, VA PD.....especially in the Hannah Graham case. At least, I have great respect for him, his method and his intelligence. JMO

 

[vestigare]

Night train,
I implore you to do a Euler diagram of the evidence you know.
Put everything that could point to a suicide into a circle.
Put everything that could point to a homicide in another circle. Then compare those that are in both circles.

Then look at those that are outside one circle and then if you can't figure out how that still doesn't point to the other then post it on here and maybe someone else can help you understand why even the task force has put that evidence into both categories

 

[vestigare]

Cady,

Sorry, my post #391 was meant for night train and I leap frogged off your post question to him and it looked like I was taking to you.

I edited. Again I am sorry.

 

[night train]

OK So, in your opinion, what they do have clearly points to homicide? It IS the same evidence....people view it from their own perspective. JMO

No,that's not my opinion,I don't yet have enough information to do anything other than keep all reasonable scenarios on the table.

 

[cady]

JMO I DO understand why some evidence can be in both categories. The preponderance of it is in the suicide category. But I have no objection to LE adding more evidence to be sorted, if and when it comes in. Just expect it to be relevant. JMO

 

[vestigare]

No,that's not my opinion,I don't yet have enough information to do anything other than keep all reasonable scenarios on the table.

That is fine. Keep them on the table but you can't say someone else is pushing a scenario that clearly is on the table. It is possible that person sees the evidence in a way that just makes one scenario more likely than the other.

Someone like me happens to approach it from the standpoint of You must prove another person was there and that that person pulled the trigger for this to even be considered homicide otherwise the only way that bullet got there was self inflicted.

 

[vestigare]

JMO I DO understand why some evidence can be in both categories. The preponderance of it is in the suicide category. But I have no objection to LE adding more evidence to be sorted, if and when it comes in. Just expect it to be relevant. JMO

I agree. I can't wrap my head around why the task force can't provide just one piece of evidence that this is homicide if they are so sure it is. They haven't provided anything and it is frustrating because like you said what they provide isn't relevant to homicide but they act like we should be wowed by it and throw down the towel and say, "Oh well there you go it is clearly homicide, we can all go home now."