VT VT - Richard Langlais, 49, Winooski, 3 January 1971

dark_shadows

Former Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
6,102
Reaction score
32
news link
august 5,2005
A medical examiner ruled the death a homicide after autopsy results showed Langlais' death was a direct result of the gunshot wounds to his chest and abdomen, according to a copy of Langlais' death certificate on file in Winooski. That decision allowed the murder charge to be brought against Bailey 34 years after the shooting.

Police reopened the dormant case in early 2004 following a tip from Bailey's wife, Lois -- who, is also the mother of convicted quadruple murderer Douglas Provost.
Family members were stunned when investigators told them they had cracked the case, said Vermont State Police Detective Sgt. Gene Douillard.

"There was not a lot of reaction," he said. "They had to sit down and digest it because it's been 34 years."

After the arraignment, four police investigators who worked on the reopened Langlais case talked about the challenge of the inquiry and their satisfaction at having made an arrest.

"It was the oldest unsolved case Winooski still had," said city Police Chief Steve McQueen.
Lois Bailey kept her secret for 33 years, until she filed a domestic-assault complaint against Kenneth Bailey, according to Douillard's statement. Detectives learned during that investigation -- which led to the sexual-assault charges involving a 9-year-old girl -- that Lois Bailey had information about the Langlais shooting.
Lois Bailey's son, Douglas Provost, was convicted of four counts of first-degree murder Oct. 31, 2003. The 38-year-old Provost shot to death four people in a Belvidere home in July 2001, one of the bloodiest killings in Vermont history. Kenneth Bailey was Provost's stepfather, according to police.

Lois Bailey testified at her son's sentencing hearing in April 2004. Pleading for leniency, she said her husband abused the family for years, and the abuse affected Provost.











news linkFriday june 9,2006
The state Supreme Court has turned aside an appeal by a man accused of a 1970s slaying in Winooski.

All five justices decided not to hear arguments from Kenneth Bailey on whether he should be immune from murder charges because his victim died more than a year after being shot. The court offered no explanation for its decision, which was announced in a one-sentence order.

Bailey, 64, formerly of Burlington, was arrested last year and pleaded not guilty to a charge of first-degree murder. Prosecutors accuse Bailey of shooting Richard Langlais, 49, during a home-invasion robbery in 1971. But because Langlais lived until September 1973 before succumbing to his injuries, Bailey argues, the murder charge is inappropriate.
 
Interesting that the abuse is now discovered when she had other issues. I don't hold these mothers in special regard when they are protecting murderors. It is like it is a bad reflection on them, and rightly so, their sons who do the murdering are reflective on the parents in some cases and in others, denial is the way to deal.In any case, responsibility is the key. And, of course, a heart bigger than your denial.

I just don't hold that some families don't see this. They may not be able to articulate it but they know in their core of cores it is wrong. They do nothing. It perpetuates the crimes and victims.I am not giving free passes lately.
 
link

An October 9, 2007 date is set for a hearing request. The request for the hearing is that the case may be dropped due to the witnesses and the evidence may not be reliable after all the years.
WCAX
Respectfully,
dark_shadows
 
Click here for link


Published: Thursday, December 6, 2007
By Adam Silverman
Free Press Staff Writer

Law-enforcement authorities violated their duty to preserve crucial evidence from a 1970s killing in Winooski, and the only proper response is to dismiss recently filed murder charges against the suspect, a Chittenden County judge has ruled.

Kenneth Bailey, 65, formerly of Burlington, is likely to be released from prison within weeks, the Corrections Department said Wednesday.

"The evidence was lost through negligence despite the importance of the case and the gravity of the charges," Judge Christina Reiss wrote, though she noted police did not act in bad faith in misplacing or destroying material. "The court seeks not to punish the state for an honest but egregious loss of evidence, but to fully safeguard the defendant's constitutional right to a fair trial."

More to the article at the link.


Respectfully,
dark_shadows
 
There is supposed to be more on this next week. I will post what I hear.

Respectfully,
dark_shadows
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
176
Guests online
2,071
Total visitors
2,247

Forum statistics

Threads
589,962
Messages
17,928,373
Members
228,020
Latest member
DazzelleShafer
Back
Top