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

[cady]

JMO I think part of the dispute here lies in the fact that LE's job is to investigate this as a homicide. While suicide is on the table, that is not what they are spending time on investigating. And even if it is determined, in the future, that it was a suicide, it will not be up to LE to tell us the motive. The case will just close. Enter, the investigative journalists. JMO

 

[vestigare]

JMO I think part of the dispute here lies in the fact that LE's job is to investigate this as a homicide. While suicide is on the table, that is not what they are spending time on investigating. And even if it is determined, in the future, that it was a suicide, it will not be up to LE to tell us the motive. The case will just close. Enter, the investigative journalists. JMO

True. Personally I think a month on they should have already had the evidence to seal it as homicide. They don't have to have finished the investigation but they should have one piece that unequivocally points to it. Since they don't it means they either didn't even begin investigating it until recently or that evidence doesn't exist and they are drawing this out for some reason. They really should not be allowed to do this. It is unprofessional to say the least.

 

[night train]

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.

12103693]
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.

Words matter.

 

[cady]

Are they waiting for Rudd and Rudd is waiting for them? If Rudd ruled "undetermined", they could go on investigating 'til doomsday. Same for homicide...but if he rules suicide, wouldn't that put an end to the investigation? I think he is waiting for proof that CG was not alone and that the other persons DNA was found to be on the gun or the clothing or the body. ????JMO

 

[vestigare]

Words matter.

Again. It clearly points to suicide because if it did not the task force would not still have suicide on the table. Clearly. I don't understand what part of this you are not understanding.

 

[cady]

Words matter.

GOOD GRIEF!!! No one here, stating their opinions, will have any bearing whatsoever in the outcome of this case. JMO

 

[vestigare]

Are they waiting for Rudd and Rudd is waiting for them? If Rudd ruled "undetermined", they could go on investigating 'til doomsday. Same for homicide...but if he rules suicide, wouldn't that put an end to the investigation? I think he is waiting for proof that CG was not alone and that the other persons DNA was found to be on the gun or the clothing or the body. ????JMO

You know I am not sure the Task force would legally have to stop investigating just because the coroner determined suicide. I imagine they can budget any investigation they want. Well obviously they can. But they would have a difficult time explaining it to someone like me who would demand they stop wasting money or give over a really good reason why they are still investigating.

I think Rudd is being diplomatic. He sees no reason to rush a determination especially when the task force keeps saying they have evidence coming back.

Might as well wait.

 

[vestigare]

What I don't understand is why more people who believe this is homicide are not furious at this task force that they are unable to gather evidence in manner that proves homicide.

If they can't even get it together enough to answer questions from journalists or bloggers or Twitter users they will never have the evidence to convict someone in court. A defence attorney would eat them alive.

 

[night train]

GOOD GRIEF!!! No one here, stating their opinions, will have any bearing whatsoever in the outcome of this case. JMO

You've ventured far afield.Words are representative of one's opinion,that's relevant to the discussion here in this forum.Ouoting someone's opinion(s) to use their WORDS to illustrate inconsistencies seems reasonable,yeah I thinks words are important,I think they "matter"

 

[cady]

What I don't understand is why more people who believe this is homicide are not furious at this task force that they are unable to gather evidence in manner that proves homicide.

If they can't even get it together enough to answer questions from journalists or bloggers or Twitter users they will never have the evidence to convict someone in court. A defence attorney would eat them alive.

True. They need a "someone" first, with a non-convincing alibi, whose DNA matches DNA at the scene. Tricky. JMO

 

[vestigare]

You've ventured far afield.Words are representative of one's opinion,that's relevant to the discussion here in this forum.Ouoting someone's opinion(s) to use their WORDS to illustrate inconsistencies seems reasonable,yeah I thinks words are important,I think they "matter"

What inconsistencies are those? None of the WORDS you used showed any inconsistencies on my part.

 

[vestigare]

True. They need a "someone" first, with a non-convincing alibi, whose DNA matches DNA at the scene. Tricky. JMO

Who also don't have a reason for their DNA to have been there independent of his death. Very very tricky.

As it stands any attorney will make a huge deal out of their equivocation for over a month and show they had reasonable doubt themselves.

 

[night train]

Again. It clearly points to suicide because if it did not the task force would not still have suicide on the table. Clearly. I don't understand what part of this you are not understanding.

IMO The general consensus is that there is a lack of clarity.Yesterday's Editorial in the Chicago Sun Times advocated that the investigation be taken away from the local task force.

You know I am not sure the Task force would legally have to stop investigating just because the coroner determined suicide. I imagine they can budget any investigation they want. Well obviously they can. But they would have a difficult time explaining it to someone like me who would demand they stop wasting money or give over a really good reason why they are still investigating.

I think Rudd is being diplomatic. He sees no reason to rush a determination especially when the task force keeps saying they have evidence coming back.

Might as well wait.

Agreed.

 

[cady]

You've ventured far afield.Words are representative of one's opinion,that's relevant to the discussion here in this forum.Ouoting someone's opinion(s) to use their WORDS to illustrate inconsistencies seems reasonable,yeah I thinks words are important,I think they "matter"

I guess I'm not understanding your complaint. How does anyones opinion on this discussion forum, have any bearing on the outcome of this case? It's a discussion. The words that DO matter are those spoken by the investigators, and the Coroner. You and I and everyone else here can think and say what we think and toss ideas around. I'm sorry that you are disturbed by other peoples thought processes so much so, that it is keeping you from opining about the case, but expressing outrage at fellow websleuthers. JMO

 

[vestigare]

For this to be homicide it requires additional evidence.
For this to be suicide it requires no additional evidence.

By all means wait for more evidence to make your decision. Have your opinions. But that in no way negates the evidence we do have nor does it create evidence out of thin air.

 

[Chuz Life]

JMO I think part of the dispute here lies in the fact that LE's job is to investigate this as a homicide. While suicide is on the table, that is not what they are spending time on investigating. And even if it is determined, in the future, that it was a suicide, it will not be up to LE to tell us the motive. The case will just close. Enter, the investigative journalists. JMO

For me, the dispute is that it's clear that LE and others are not being (publicly) objective and considerate enough towards this case being a suicide. It is clear in LE's communications, that they are strongly biased in their investigation and they WANT this to be a homicide case so badly that my personal concern is that some evidence could get overlooked and other evidence could be exaggerated, imagined or even fabricated in their attempt to "rule out" suicide.

I find it telling that a department so determined to pursue this investigation as a homicide has not found a way to take suicide off the table - already. Especially given that it's clear that they would like to do so. For that, I am frankly surprised and even a little grateful to see that - as uncomfortable to the investigators as it is - they know that they can't afford to rule out the possibility that this was a suicide. Yet.

 

[vestigare]

IMO The general consensus is that there is a lack of clarity.Yesterday's Editorial in the Chicago Sun Times advocated that the investigation be taken away from the local task force.



Agreed.

Are misunderstanding where the clarity is lacking. The Task force has said they are still keeping suicide on the table however they are investigating it as a homicide. They then drip drip information they claim shows homicide and then turn around and say it doesn't disprove suicide. So they clearly believe the evidence they know doesn't prove homicide.

I think people want it out of the task force hands because it has become a farce. You can not keep investigating for something that there is no evidence to date that it ever occurred. They will keep throwing money and manpower doing expensive and laborious tests that probably at this point even if one little piece points to another person you would have to prove then that person was involved and that would require more money more tests more more more. People can see this isn't logical. We aren't as stupid as this task force hoped we were.

I pointed out above that as it stands we require no additional evidence to rule this suicide. None. But we do require additional evidence this is homicide and they have yet to provide it. That is clear. I don't think the feds will come in and funds a magical piece of evidence. I think they will come in, say the evidence is suicide and then end the investigation.

 

[vestigare]

For me, the dispute is that it's clear that LE and others are not being (publicly) objective and considerate enough towards this case being a suicide. It is clear in LE's communications, that they are strongly biased in their investigation and they WANT this to be a homicide case so badly that my personal concern is that some evidence could get overlooked and other evidence could be exaggerated, imagined or even fabricated in their attempt to "rule out" suicide.

I find it telling that a department so determined to pursue this investigation as a homicide has not found a way to take suicide off the table - already. Especially given that it's clear that they would like to do so. For that, I am frankly surprised and even a little grateful to see that - as uncomfortable to the investigators as it is - they know that they can't afford to rule out the possibility that this was a suicide. Yet.

Exactly. Well said.
What concerns me as well is so many people are so quick to accept flimsy evidence in court and it scares me that this task force appears to be feeding us drops of flimsy evidence and they get angry when we don't accept it. This indicates to me that some of their investigative skills rely heavily on flimsy evidence or faulty logic and they are frustrated it isn't working for them this time.

How many other cases have they investigated from this standpoint?
Certainly this case is putting them under a microscope and they don't look good imo.

 

[vestigare]

More questions for the task force.
-Did the family have an independent autopsy or
-Who chose Montez
-Has Montez received certification, did he pass his pathology board exams
-Would you turn the investigation over to the feds or another appointed board of investigators
-Have you consulted a PR firm or had internal meetings regarding fallout if this is suicide
-Has anyone in govt outside the task force intimated there would be fallout if this is suicide. If yes, who? And what was said.

 

[cady]

Not that they are about to tell us, but I would really like to see a timeline of CG's activities, places, conversations etc, from the morning of the 31st Aug , through the whole day and evening and night, and the same for the morning of Sept.1. JMO