Toronto Police, Stacey Gallant, Cher discussed on Uncover



Okay. My name is Stacey. Gallant Detective Sergeant with the Toronto Police Service Stacey Gallant is the detective sergeant in charge urge of cold cases for the Toronto Police. We have over six hundred fifty current cold cases in Toronto. Cher means is one of them. She's listed as has homicide number thirty six for the year nineteen ninety nine. We don't reinvestigate cases in the cold case office. Homicides are investigated by top level investigators from start to finish by the time it becomes a cold case that really means that everything that could have been done during the case has been done and and the investigation has no more leads to follow and there's nothing left that the original investigators can do gallant confirms producer Kathleen Goal Tar something mad had mentioned that after the original nineteen ninety nine investigation the cold case squad took another look into Charlene's murder but the reinvestigation instigation in two thousand and eleven what prompted I would say new new information that came in no unfortunately between the two investigations that happened they were unable to bring it to the point where any anyone could be arrested or prosecution could be mounted although gallant won't talk about the new information which prompted the second investigation we know what coincided with Tippett's dangerous offender hearing so you have somebody in homicide. WHO's a personal interest? They don't they don't get convicted for this crime. They go on and commit a whole bunch of other crimes have very similar similar details to the one you're looking at. Can that be used to put a case forward right to the crown saying similar fact evidence can be used in certain circumstances but I don't think that in and of itself is enough to mount a prosecution against someone that's going to lead to conviction in court. Were so close in with the original homicide investigation you had so much circumstantial evidence and now you have this this. Could it be enough to hypothetically tip it over. That's not my call. That's up to the crown's office. That's up to you know a judge to decide. you know if. I think you need more than circumstantial evidence. You need more than similar fact evidence it you know without without some direct evidence. I it's very very difficult to convict someone a murder..

Coming up next