CANADA Canada - Nicole Morin, 8, Toronto, 30 July 1985

Discussion in '1980's Missing' started by georgiagirl, Nov 18, 2005.

  1. Chorley8

    Chorley8 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,268
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    48
    1. I did the same thing a few years ago. I was interested in the idea that a daughter of a man who lived in the building same age as Nicole...was Nicole. I was told the facial measurements made it impossible so that may be the case with your tip but I don't know.
    2. the lack of Nicole's name in the obit: well if the mother knew Nicole was alive and had a child that would explain it....the trouble is there is every indication her father really was looking for Nicole through his own researches. I wonder who wrote the obit.

    3. not to get too crazy though this probably is....could she have another daughter she gave away say as a teen and is Nicole really the grandaughter...took care of her because the mother could not for some reason. She looks a lot like her Dad though.

    4. Murder victim Sharon Morningstar Keenan's grandfather died not too long ago and all other grandchildren were mentioned but not Sharin.
     
    Kittymama and dotr like this.
  2. gregjrichards

    gregjrichards Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,504
    Likes Received:
    22,707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thank you for doing this. It is pretty common not to receive a reply from law enforcement in regards to a tip sent in from my experience.
     
    dotr likes this.
  3. jaycool

    jaycool Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Hi Chorley, i vividly remember your posts when i first read the thread from start to finish to get a better idea of the case, i remember someone mentioning that they thought another child in the same building resembled Nicole as if another family had taken her in. I would have very much liked to have seen the picture you had.

    The lack of "Nicole" in the orbit to me certainly has some kind of deeper meaning but i am not sure myself what that means, it just stands out to me.
    Do you think the mother had some part in her disappearance? Was seeing Nicole in secret prior to her passing? Just trying to understand your ideas.

    In the points 2 and 3 you make some interesting ideas but I am not very bright in understanding them i admit. Why would you think being left off the orbit would mean she is still alive, am i not seeing something? It could very well be that Nicole had a different mother, I considered this angle.

    It would be interesting to know who wrote the orbit also because leaving out Nicole's name is very confusing, it seems like a very big error to make.

    To be descriptive of the mystery woman's picture i submitted she has a very similar face structure to Nicole, the smile is similar, the expression, the cheeks and their creases, face shape, nose is arguably similar etc. The only thing that is different is the hair, lack of fringe, teeth and forehead is arguably smaller.

    I did put the two photos together to make a comparison, the young Nicole's picture fits over the mystery woman's facial structure very accurately which could imply they are the same person or that this woman is a "possible relative". I considered the woman may even be Nicole's child assuming she is still alive and a mother.

    It could be they have similar ancestry. The mystery woman looks like two of the age enhanced pics of Nicole which is another reason i submitted it.. If anyone wanted to see the picture of this woman i would gladly send it privately, obviously i cant share it here.

    I am fairly confident something will be found out about this case in the future, just a feeling i get, what happened to her was quick and planned IMO.

    Cheers
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2018
    Kittymama and dotr like this.
  4. jaycool

    jaycool Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Hi Greg. Thanks for the message

    I have to admit I was left wondering if they had even looked at it and taken it seriously. Its a shame i did not hear back from either.

    I will only do what i think is right, i would be over the moon if i had located a missing person.
    I can only suspect the lack of response is because a tip is not successful or because they are not interested.

    The Police never received the photo or any other information from me.
    Crimestoppers; i sent them the photo and some information in the hope they would pass it on to the Police, I dont know if they did anything with it.

    Cheers
     
    gregjrichards, Kittymama and dotr like this.
  5. dotr

    dotr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    26,157
    Likes Received:
    16,752
    Trophy Points:
    113
  6. crazyladi

    crazyladi Active Member

    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I remember the paper coming out and her in a red bathing suit if I am not mistaken with white dots on it and a towel around her. Where did they come up with this pic that was on the cover of the SUN? I remember that day and paper so clearly that I can't get this image out of my mind. This case has haunted me since she was taken.
     
    musicaljoke, Chorley8 and dotr like this.
  7. jaycool

    jaycool Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Thanks for this, sounds interesting. When talking of the SUN do you mean the Toronto sun? Who came forward with the information about her wearing a red suit?
    I notice sources say she was in a peach bathing suit, a white t-shirt, a bag, towel and some other belongings.

    Is it possible the picture was a fake one, a modified one? Was it info given by a witness? Though i wonder why they would show her in a red swimsuit given a media outlet wants to remain true to the case and not muddy waters with false information. Was it another girl wearing red falsely reported?

    PS: Watching the video above reminds me of the fact Nicole's father and friend were away, cant help but think the perp may have realized this and pounced. This would be double true if it happened the first day AFTER her friend went on vacation and had previously met her at the apartment, JMO.
     
    crazyladi, Chorley8 and dotr like this.
  8. Kittymama

    Kittymama Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    476
    Likes Received:
    287
    Trophy Points:
    63
    So...I've followed this case for a long time, but I have NEVER heard before that the mother had another child that "disappeared" for 15 years before Nicole. That...strains the limits of credibility, IMO. I know the first kid was from the child's father taking him away, but still. Two kids "disappear" on you? Ehhh....

    Could it be that she'd already had one child taken away, and she was NOT going to have another one taken, come what may? I do have to wonder.
     
    dotr likes this.
  9. jaycool

    jaycool Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    18
    That's an interesting theory you have there, like a protective or defensive measure the mother took in advance to make sure no one took Nicole away from her including authorities to feel like she was in control of the situation, if she had another child taken away then i guess it could make her more fearful of it happening again.

    I have always been interested in how the Mother Jeanette was cleared in the case, i dont think she did a lie detector or at least i haven't seen a source saying this, i agree that when there is smoke there is fire. Its certainly rare to lose two children. The "i am going to disappear" note that Nicole wrote have been a hint to something.
     
    Chorley8 and dotr like this.
  10. Chorley8

    Chorley8 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,268
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The one thing the Nicole case really has going for it, why there is some hope it can be solved is that her friend is now with the police and is either on the case or has an interest in it. I am not saying it would be ignored o/w but surely this helps.
     
    musicaljoke and dotr like this.
  11. Giuc0

    Giuc0 Active Member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Humm, we are not in the US, we are in Canada !!
    In Canada, a lie detector is inadmissible in criminal Court. And a polygraph is far from accurate !!
    Can evidence of a polygraph test be used in court? | Provincial Court of British Columbia I know that this link is about British Columbia, not Ontario. However, polygraph inadmissibility in Canadian criminal trials stem from this Supreme Court judgment : CanLII - 1987 CanLII 27 (SCC)

    Wishing a machine predicting the truth or lie is, at best, wishful thinking !


    Doesn't mean impossible, nor "mother is guilty".

    Ok. But as a standalone, it doesn't prove mother's guilt.
     
    crazyladi, musicaljoke and dotr like this.
  12. jaycool

    jaycool Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Giuc0 your post comes across as aggressive in parts. I think your reading into my post, the way you have misrepresented my post is a little unpleasant.

    I am well aware this case is in Canada. No need to patronize.

    I know the law, I'm not talking about what is/isn't permissible in courts. Your making the assumption that i think polygraphs are simply a means to put someone behind bars and that i am doing that, some of us dont think like this, i certainly dont. They have more of a use around the world than just convicting someone.

    Does it matter if they cant be used in court? Well sure if you think i am trying to convict someone then it would matter to you. But i am not trying to convict someone here, i am simply discussing why polygraphs are interesting and "why" (a word that deserves more credit) a person may fail/avoid one.

    I am not discussing them as a means to portray someone as a suspect as you are doing. People are ok to question why people avoid polygraphs or fail them, i see no harm in people who do this and i am talking generally anyway.

    You come across as defensive about something i have said. If so I am sorry you feel that way, i dont think the mother is guilty just so you know, nor do i think its impossible shes involved either, i trust the authorities have done a decent job overall. I know what a polygraph does. I dont use polygraphs to "prove" such things.

    Precisely, who says it does? In some countries a failed polygraph would be a starting point to look further at someone without labeling them as "suspect".

    If your asking if i think it is the mother then no i don't, i dont think it is the father either, i think it is a complete stranger from the building or someone who is connected to the family in some way.

    As for Nicole and what she wrote on paper i was not connecting that to the mother, you have done that for some reason. I was leaving that open for people here to decide for themselves.

    You have taken my comment a bit too literally. The whole "where there is smoke there is fire" is again not me talking about the mother, it is about me agreeing with the quote itself, it is saying the probability of 2 kids going missing from the same family in the way they did is rare, thus looking at family and connections made sense.

    I am not saying authorities should be still looking at Jeanette, clearly they know more than i do. When a person comes to this thread and sees the "2 kids missing" detail it is something that immediately stands out to them, i agree with their thinking; it does looks suspicious. Nothing more to it than that.

    Peace
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2018
    dotr likes this.
  13. crazyladi

    crazyladi Active Member

    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38

    Yes the Toronto Sun. I am wondering if the picture on the paper was a previously taken one. I would love to see the cover of that paper but not sure where to look in archives.
     
    Jim_M and dotr like this.
  14. dotr

    dotr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    26,157
    Likes Received:
    16,752
    Trophy Points:
    113
  15. Jim_M

    Jim_M Honest American Bison (Buffalo)

    Messages:
    1,559
    Likes Received:
    7,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    dotr likes this.
  16. Woodland

    Woodland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,358
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is this article is from July 2014? That's what I am reading - maybe it's me.

    Fwiw, there is something I don't understand about many cold cases. SOP today is, someone known to a victim caused their death or disappearance. LE starts at the inner most circle of the victim and works their way out until they hopefully find proof of a perp.

    But in cold cases it's presumed to be someone unknown to the victim, imo making everyone run around in circles trying to figure out 'who dun it'.

    It was mom in this case - jmo. Who saw Nicole on the day she was reported missing? No one as far as I have ever read. Chances are, Nicole met her demise 24 hours before she was reported missing. Mom wanted her husband back - and he did come back after Nicole was missing - for a while.
     
    Jim_M and dotr like this.
  17. jaycool

    jaycool Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I think the challenge to the idea that Nicole disappeared the previous day is the fact that Nicole did (apparently) talk to the friend the day she went missing, that is why i personally dont think she went missing the day before. But it is an interesting idea none the less.

    There were some supposed witnesses who claim to have seen Nicole on the day she went missing but whether their accounts hold any weight at all i dont know, LE are so focused on the top floor of the building making me think the witnesses were not necessarily reliable and the crime took place around the elevator.

    Apart from the theory about her being abducted on one of the floors the only other alternative I could come up with is that she came down the elevator much later with another person (unknown person) who accompanied her to a vehicle in the car park, someone she must have trusted enough.

    There is one thing for sure, Nicole did not leave the area without getting into or being put into a vehicle of some sort. It leaves me wondering if cadaver dogs were used on the cars owned by residents of the building, though the perp could have had a secret vehicle that was not tracked. No hit from the dogs though which is odd.
     
    Jim_M and dotr like this.
  18. Woodland

    Woodland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,358
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's my understanding that NM spoke to a friend through the intercom only, when the friend arrived for a prearranged meeting to go swimming. If I wanted to sound like a child speaking into an intercom, I would press the speak button and stand back my full arms length and use a slightly higher pitched tone.

    Mom ran a daycare from home - have never read that anyone dropping off their child saw or spoke to Nicole that day. I would change my mind if I knew for certain another person saw her.

    I would never have made my 9 year-old go down in an elevator to the ground floor for the mail and come back, knowing she would go down again within minutes to go swimming. I also would not have waited until dinner time to begin looking for my 9 year-old who I had not seen all day and who should have been back from swimming hours before.

    Mom's actions are just so wrong here imo.
     
    dotr likes this.
  19. jaycool

    jaycool Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Would the friend be so easily fooled by a fake voice over telecom? I really dont know about that.

    To be fair when i first read the case i did have that gut feeling that something was off about the mother and her actions on the day, but now i dont know.
    I think i even mentioned in one of my first posts on this thread that it took the mother Jeanette so long to contact LE, late afternoon time i think?

    I think back in the 80s people were far more trusting of their kids compared to now. A child walking to the store was common place back then.
    I cant make my mind up on that one but i certainly would not let my kids walk around a big building like this on their own.

    It can be hard for people to consider that their child could just disappear on an elevator or in the hallway of an apartment complex full of people.
    If kids dropped off at the daycare did not see Nicole that could be an interesting point, were children actually asked if they saw Nicole that day?

    Its possible the mother used the elevator during work hours but did not mention this to avoid losing her job, leaving kids unattended. Who knows.
     
    dotr likes this.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice