Found Deceased NH - Celina Cass, 11, Stewartstown, 25 July 2011 #10 *Arrest*

[Chris_Texas]

Chris: hope this link works better! :innocent:

http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/08/27/news/doc4e5906f273ec0673281342.txt


BBM! #1. Saturday 8/27/2011 was the date the body was discovered, the date of death is undetermined as of this posting.
#2. OH yeah!
IBM/U Here's the point of this issue IMHO: it is the obligation of members of any profession to give the public the FACTS as they can be established vs hypothetical thoughts. :innocent: Given any death scene, there are general lessons or information points that can be shared with the general public as in "please keep aware of your surroundings at all times, travel with your vehicle's doors locked, park your vehicle in a secure/lit area.....etc" without providing specifics of a particular investigative case. :innocent:The other "danger" in death scenes is "jumping to conclusions" as folks who commented on the local area TV station report did! http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/new_haven_cty/suspicous-death-in-new-haven :maddening: BTW: I'm not willing to give the copywriter a break with the "headline" on the WTNH link, Hurricane Irene or NOT, that statement is/was baffling!

Let me see if I understand this...

In your opinion, in GENERAL (and setting aside the exceptions) if the facts of the case lead a professional to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the case was a homocide, it would be unprofessional or unusual to conceal this potential danger from the public?

Note: again, no one is accusing the professionals involved in this case of violating this. I am, in fact, arguing that they would NOT violate this. I believe that if they had evidence of homocide that they would inform the public, and that it would be really odd (at least) for them to conceal something like this from the public unless they had some damn good reason for doing so.

 

[cluciano63]

Suppose they do find something in the tox that allows them to give a cause of death; that still might not give them a manner of death...

 

[WizPro]

that the case was a homocide, ...

Does that mean the perpetrator was a female? :waitasec:

 

[justanother]

I don't have much time but just wanted to check in..... any new news?

 

[~greeneyedgirl~]

Argh... It's been so long already, lets get these wheels moving in justice for Celina

 

[joypath]

Let me see if I understand this...

In your opinion, in GENERAL (and setting aside the exceptions) if the facts of the case lead a professional to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the case was a homocide, it would be unprofessional or unusual to conceal this potential danger from the public?

Note: again, no one is accusing the professionals involved in this case of violating this. I am, in fact, arguing that they would NOT violate this. I believe that if they had evidence of homocide that they would inform the public, and that it would be really odd (at least) for them to conceal something like this from the public unless they had some damn good reason for doing so.

BBM/U Therein lies the gist of the entire matter of discussion: FACTS of THE case (autopsy data, laboratory data, death scene evidence, investigative evidence, et al ) permit/demonstrate/allow/present/confirm/mandate within a degree of professional certainty to which one may testify under oath on a witness stand or by adhering one's signature as a forensic pathologist/ medical examiner/coroner to a legal document that the manner of death is a homicide.:rocker: From that point onward, it is the responsibility of the legal system to determine if the information should be shared with the community as a whole. IF there were a specific potential danger to a community at large, I believe that stronger language and activity would have been evident beyond the statement to adhere to (paraphrased here) "general (common sense) vigilance".
WHY, one might ask and :twocents: my answer would be because the term "homicide" itself can encompass death scenarios that DO NOT involve the general public but are victim(s)/perpetrator(s) specific and thus over-extending details may result in overt public hysteria.
Again, the term "conceal" is a slight misnomer since as we observers know, thus far, the death has not been classified.

 

[cluciano63]

If Celina was murdered, the public has a right to know, since no one has been arrested. That would mean that a child murderer is "out there". I guess some people have concluded that the SF is the guilty party, since he is in a hospital and the police would not have to worry about him murdering anyone else. But LE has no say about whether or not he is released, do they? And they have not made any indications that I am aware of that they believe him to be the perp, have they?

I would not be comfortable, if I lived there and had children, anymore than I would be if I lived near Skyline school in Portland with a child.

 

[GutInstinct]

...nothing new, however. Sigh.

http://blogs.discovery.com/criminal...l-disappearance-a-murder-motive-surfaces.html

 

[Chris_Texas]

BBM/U Therein lies the gist of the entire matter of discussion: FACTS of THE case (autopsy data, laboratory data, death scene evidence, investigative evidence, et al ) permit/demonstrate/allow/present/confirm/mandate within a degree of professional certainty to which one may testify under oath on a witness stand or by adhering one's signature as a forensic pathologist/ medical examiner/coroner to a legal document that the manner of death is a homicide.:rocker: From that point onward, it is the responsibility of the legal system to determine if the information should be shared with the community as a whole. IF there were a specific potential danger to a community at large, I believe that stronger language and activity would have been evident beyond the statement to adhere to (paraphrased here) "general (common sense) vigilance".
WHY, one might ask and :twocents: my answer would be because the term "homicide" itself can encompass death scenarios that DO NOT involve the general public but are victim(s)/perpetrator(s) specific and thus over-extending details may result in overt public hysteria.
Again, the term "conceal" is a slight misnomer since as we observers know, thus far, the death has not been classified.

Thanks! :rocker:

I would think that scenarios that restrict the list of potential suspects in this way would have questionable value. Regardless of the theory, there is nothing to say that a killer -- even one who selected their victim based on a personal hatred for that one individual -- might not decide to add to their score by picking off another kid or three. Further, it seems unlikely to me that the police would have evidence that precise about the motivation behind a crime (so exact that they can safely say, "This person might have killed xxxx, but they're pretty much harmless now") without also having enough evidence to make an arrest.

Just random thoughs

Thanks again for answering my question.

 

[Kiln Wood]

BBM/U Therein lies the gist of the entire matter of discussion: FACTS of THE case (autopsy data, laboratory data, death scene evidence, investigative evidence, et al ) permit/demonstrate/allow/present/confirm/mandate within a degree of professional certainty to which one may testify under oath on a witness stand or by adhering one's signature as a forensic pathologist/ medical examiner/coroner to a legal document that the manner of death is a homicide.:rocker: From that point onward, it is the responsibility of the legal system to determine if the information should be shared with the community as a whole. IF there were a specific potential danger to a community at large, I believe that stronger language and activity would have been evident beyond the statement to adhere to (paraphrased here) "general (common sense) vigilance".
WHY, one might ask and :twocents: my answer would be because the term "homicide" itself can encompass death scenarios that DO NOT involve the general public but are victim(s)/perpetrator(s) specific and thus over-extending details may result in overt public hysteria.Again, the term "conceal" is a slight misnomer since as we observers know, thus far, the death has not been classified.

Second bolded area bolded by me

Right on, joypath!!!

Thank you for a most insightful post.....

 

[Kiln Wood]

If you were the parent of a young girl, or perhaps any parent, knowing that the police suspect a child murderer is loose in your town probably would influence how you lead your life.

If the police and medical examiners have evidence that this is a homocide they have an ethical (and likely professional) obligation to inform the public. They do not need to offer details, theories, evidence, but they do (in my opinion) need to inform the public. There are only a couple reasons I can think of for concealing this. The first is if they are anticipating making an immediate arrest, where notifying the public is unnecessary and risks tipping off the bad guy.

The second instance is more cynical. A suspected homocide tells the public that a crime took place -- the most serious crime there is. The public expects to see some results. A suspicious death, on the other hand, there's no evidence a crime took place at all. Failing to prosecute the first is a big deal politically. Failing to prosecute the second? Not so much. What is there to prosecute...

BBM

What about a situation in which the police KNOW who the "child murderer" is and KNOW that "child murderer" is NOT "loose," Chris_Texas?

Look forward to reading your posts every night when I log on and missed them last night when I couldn't log on because the wake of "Mean Irene" left us without power for almost three hours!!!

 

[cluciano63]

BBM

What about a situation in which the police KNOW who the "child murderer" is and KNOW that "child murderer" is NOT "loose," Chris_Texas?

Look forward to reading your posts every night when I log on and missed them last night when I couldn't log on because the wake of "Mean Irene" left us without power for almost three hours!!!

If they know, why are they offering a reward?

 

[Chris_Texas]

BBM

What about a situation in which the police KNOW who the "child murderer" is and KNOW that "child murderer" is NOT "loose," Chris_Texas?

I assume here you are talking about step-dad in the mental hospital as a "what if" hypothetical? I would assume (not an expert) that the police would likely arrest him and place him in custody either there at that hospital or in their jail. Assuming that they have this evidence, and I do not believe they do, it's not like they really gain anything by leaving him in there.

If he is arrested the psych guys and lawyers will all get together with the judge to decide if he is competent to stand trial. This competency hearing (whatever it is called) is not going to hinge on the guy's location when arrested, but upon the expert testimony of the medical professionals who interview him. This hearing, as I understand it, is to essentially determine if the guy is 'with it' enough to understand and participate in his trial. Even if he voluntarily left, supposedly cured, someone could claim that the shock of arrest caused him to have a relapse. If anything, an extended stay might hurt here.

Nor will a stay, extended or brief, help much with an insanity defense at the trial. His mental state at the time of the crime is the question there, not his mental state following. I am FAR less concerned about this than other issues. If the killer (whoever this is -- assuming there is one) is judged to be insane then he probably really is, and he deserves to be treated with whatever compassion and care the justice system deems appropriate. In any case he will be heading to a jail of some kind, and likely for a long long long time.

Look forward to reading your posts every night when I log on and missed them last night when I couldn't log on because the wake of "Mean Irene" left us without power for almost three hours!!!

Thanks! Glad you are back with us.

 

[Chris_Texas]

If they know, why are they offering a reward?

Cover?

In any case it is a hypothetical question.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I am certainly not critical of anyone who thinks Jane Young is great, but I do not care for her or her tactics in the way she handles a case.

People do have a right to know if a murderer is loose in their town. No one will ever make me believe that the ME does not know whether or not the manner of death was homicide.

I check in to see if the case has advanced and if there is any news. Celina should have justice.

MOO

 

[DLT88]

If they know, why are they offering a reward?

Maybe to help build a case if anyone has witnessed anything on the person they might already suspect?

 

[Joe Friday]

NH school starts without Celina

Teachers at a tiny New Hampshire elementary school on opening day Tuesday were ready for questions about the suspicious death of a schoolmate this summer but they weren't going to initiate any discussion.

School Superintendent Robert Mills said teachers were briefed last week by a pediatric trauma specialist in preparation for the start of classes at Stewartstown Community School, where 11-year-old Celina Cass would have started the fifth grade.

(Snipped)

New Hampshire investigators trying to solve the mystery of Celina's disappearance and death continue to await tips and toxicology results. Senior Assistant Attorney General Jane Young had hoped to have toxicology and other test results last week, but said it was not unusual for the process to take as long as eight weeks.

(Snipped)

Read more at link: http://www.chron.com/news/article/NH-school-starts-without-Celina-2147678.php

 

[Joe Friday]

If Celina was murdered, the public has a right to know, since no one has been arrested. That would mean that a child murderer is "out there". I guess some people have concluded that the SF is the guilty party, since he is in a hospital and the police would not have to worry about him murdering anyone else. But LE has no say about whether or not he is released, do they? And they have not made any indications that I am aware of that they believe him to be the perp, have they?

I would not be comfortable, if I lived there and had children, anymore than I would be if I lived near Skyline school in Portland with a child.

Until the ME declares Celene's death a homicide, I don't think you will see anyone charged with murder.

Hopefully once the tox reports come in there will be some answers in the case.



JMO

 

[Chris_Texas]

I am certainly not critical of anyone who thinks Jane Young is great, but I do not care for her or her tactics in the way she handles a case.

People do have a right to know if a murderer is loose in their town. No one will ever make me believe that the ME does not know whether or not the manner of death was homicide.

I check in to see if the case has advanced and if there is any news. Celina should have justice.

MOO

With all respect, I think you are being a bit premature. I believe that if the authorities had evidence that that led them to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this crime was a homicide, that they would say as much. In my opinion doing otherwise would be unprofessional, unethical, and grossly negligent.

I believe that the AAG came as close as she could to calling this a homicide investigation. Her inflection and tone made it clear (to me, your opinion may vary) that she believes this to be a criminal case, but lacks the evidence to say it with professional certainty that it is a homicide.

I do, however, share your frustration. Nor am I tolerant of empty platitudes and evasive non-answers. I would say that the public has been very patient with the AG's office dog-and-pony show, but the time is coming soon when the police and AAG's office need to provide some answers--even if those answers reveal more about what went wrong with their investigation then they do about the identity of Celina's killer.

But that's just me.

 

[Chris_Texas]

NH school starts without Celina

Teachers at a tiny New Hampshire elementary school on opening day Tuesday were ready for questions about the suspicious death of a schoolmate this summer but they weren't going to initiate any discussion.

School Superintendent Robert Mills said teachers were briefed last week by a pediatric trauma specialist in preparation for the start of classes at Stewartstown Community School, where 11-year-old Celina Cass would have started the fifth grade.

(Snipped)

New Hampshire investigators trying to solve the mystery of Celina's disappearance and death continue to await tips and toxicology results. Senior Assistant Attorney General Jane Young had hoped to have toxicology and other test results last week, but said it was not unusual for the process to take as long as eight weeks.

(Snipped)

Read more at link: http://www.chron.com/news/article/NH-school-starts-without-Celina-2147678.php

So now, suddenly, eight-weeks is normal?

Somehow they managed to unscramble the dozens of conflicting and interacting chemicals in Michael Jackson's body in a month. Heath Ledger's toxicology tests also showed complex (and lethal) multi-drug interactions yet took only a couple of weeks. The singer Amy Winehouse's toxicology tests took about a month. Anna Nicole Smith's toxicology tests took six or seven weeks despite the eleven different drugs rampaging around in her system. In all of the above the initial screening tests were positive for multiple drugs and required more elaborate follow up testing.

In other words, they took LONGER than normal.

Are we to believe that Celina had a secret life as a hard-partying pop superstar? But then, even if she did, and they had to unscramble a laundry list of crazy chemicals to determine which weird and unexpected combination finished her off, as we can see above eight weeks would not be routine. And Celina was NOT a popstar. I will go out on a limb and speculate that Celina did NOT have a wild and crazy rockstar-mix of a half-dozen drugs in her system.

So how long is normal? Obviously the answer is not eight weeks.

According the Slate.com: "NMS Labs in Willow Grove, Pa., for example, employs about 200 scientists for 40,000 cases and averages seven to 11 days for a toxicology report..." http://www.slate.com/id/2182156/

Draw your own conclusions.