Part Five: Interrogation Of An Innocent Mother: Another Opinion From The OPP Behaviouralist;

"IT IS OUR OPINION, THAT THE INFORMATION IS CONSISTENT TO A HIGH PROBABILITY, WITH LIANNE GAGNON BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF (NICHOLAS). THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS OPINION."

FROM REPORT OF ONTARIO PROVINCIAL POLICE BEHAVIOURAL SCIENTIST DETECTIVE SERGEANT JIM VAN ALLEN BASED IN PART ON A LETTER SEIZED UNDER A SEARCH WARRANT FROM NICHOLAS' CASKET.

(The recently posted concise chronology for this series will hopefully help the reader negotiate this series of several postings which is called, "Interrogation of an innocent mother;")

At the end of the last posting, I suggested that the obtaining of a search warrant to seize a letter placed in Nicholas' casket by his mother was, a "mere prelude to an outright investigative assault on Lianne Gagnon."

Let me explain.

The "overview report" prepared by Commission staff and a "case history" prepared by the Sudbury Regional police force, tell us that the police did more than simply open and read Lianne's letter: They faxed a copy of it to Detective Sergeant Jim Van Allen, a member of the Ontario Provincial Police Behavioural Sciences Unit.

Van Allan is the officer who determined that Lianne Gagnon had likely been responsible for Nicholas' death after analyzing a statement she gave to the police just after Nicholas had suddenly died in the family home.

The police also provided Van Allen with a transcript of an "interview" conducted with Lianne on June 19, 1997, which along with the letter seized from the casket, would serve as a basis for his opinion.

(The police clearly prefer words like "interview" suggesting an application for a job rather than "interrogation," which is what this aggressive confrontation really was. H.L)

As the overview report indicates:

"D/Sgt. Van Allen provided a further statement analysis with investigative suggestions to Sgt. Keetch. D/Sgt. Van Allen's investigative suggestions included involving Mr. Tolin in attempting to elicit a confession from Ms. Gagnon. D?Sgt. Allen suggested this attempt be made at the ens of July 1997. He observed Ms. Gagnon had planned to marry on August 2, 1997. He noted, "(t)he preceding period, in conjunction with waiting for the police investigation to conclude will be a very emotional time for her. This should be added to, by orchestrating events by police.' D/Sgt. Van Allen suggested the promise that of forthcoming forensic results, "sudden developments" in the investigation and renewed police contacts may cause Ms. Gagnon to disclose the truth."

Van Allan's letter to the Sudbury force, dated July 9, 1997, is lengthy but worthy of reproduction in full because of the insight it gives us into the art of police behavioural science - especially as we now know that Lianne was an utterly innocent mother who's beloved 11-month old died a tragic but accidental death.

It is addressed to Detective Sergeant Keetch re: Statement analysis & investigative suggestions death investigation of (Nicholas) second report.

"This analysis was prepared by Detective Sergeant Jim Van Allan, in consultation with other members of the the Ontario Provincial Police Behavioural Sciences Section. Principles of scientific content analysis and criminal investigative analysis were used to consider the following information," the letter begins.

"- Video taped interview of Lianne Gagnon;
- Indirect personality assessment;
- Letter obtained from casket of (Nicholas);
- Consultations with investigator on 01 and 04 July, 1997;
-Consideration of previous analysis of written statement of Lianne Gagnon."

Then there are some caveats:

"This analysis is is based upon the accuracy of the information submitted, and the training, education, and experience of the analysts.

"This analysis contains fact, theories and speculation, Where necessary, opinions will be identified as such, so that the proper weight can be attached to them. It is not a substitute for a well planned and thorough investigation."(

I'll drink to that! H.L.)

Then Van Allen provides final line, saying: "It is our opinion, that the information is consistent to a high probability, with Lianne Gagnon being responsible for the death of (Nicholas). The following is submitted in support of this opinion."

Now for the bulk of the Van Allen's letter to Keetch, under the heading; "Analysis of Letter from Casket of (Nicholas):

"In comparison to the written statement of L. Gagnon, in which she didn't refer to the deceased by name, or as her son, this letter contains numerous changing references to the child. (Nicholas, my darling, sweetie, babies, my beautiful baby boy, and my precious Nicholas) In comparison, this is an overuse of terms which are unjustified by the changes."

(As I read this I think I am starting to feel nauseous. H.L.)

"In our opinion, the letter appears to be written for others to read, and seems to contain quotes from others, which she does not include herself by using personal pronouns such as I or me. These are:

"There are no other babies in the world as beautiful as you are, or as smart and personable and funny."

"Everyone loves your precious blue eyes, golden blond hair, and a smile that could light up a room."

"It is unexpected that the mother of a deceased child would refer to him in the past, present and future tense. Gagnon refers to her child in with me" two tenses in some sentences "...but I wished you could be here with me", is past tense, and suggests that she doesn't wish he could be with her at the time of writing."

(I am becoming increasingly ill the more I read this "analysis"; H.L.);

"The letter contains no indication of grief, despair, or hopelessness for the future without the child. Gagnon doesn't add that she loved the child until the closing of the letter. In the sentence, "You loved and your love was returned a million times by your mommy and everyone who knew you", the distance in the sentence between the child and the mother is significant, and is believed to reflect the distance in the exact relationship. Distances in the relationship is appear in other sentences as well".

(As I read this drivel, I am thinking how poor Lianne Gagnon got the worst that our criminal justice system can offer: First, Dr. Charles Randal Smith and now this... H.L);

"References to being loved, are "passively stated" which doesn't indicate personal commitments to the statement, such as; "you are loved and how sincerely you will be missed". Everyone loves your..."And you are loved in heaven".

"References of bad conduct are not expected in a farewell to a deceased infant, such as; "Aggrivate (sic), you be a good boy, and hard time".

The sentence, "I hope as a friend says, you sid among the clouds with golden wings...... is a curious misspelling which suggests a consideration of S. I.D.S. (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) to explain the death as something other than an accident".

(Absurd and preposterous. H.L.)

"The writer refers to herself in the third person as "your mommy" which deflects commitment in statements, instead of using personal pronouns such as I or me. The writer signed as "mommy", which was not capitalized anywhere in the letter. In comparison, I, Christmas, You,Tom Petty, Everyone, We, Danny, Jake, Grandpa, Muffin, Tibby, and Mooch are capitalized".

(Give me, oh please give me a break H.L.)

"The sentence, "I'm afraid sweetie, I don't understand" begs for further explanation, and isn't in the context of an accidental death."

"The final sentence of a letter is important. I expect it would be very important in a final farewell and contain heartfelt emotion. "Be careful dear, and don't bump your head", suggests it is more important for the writer to have people believe the child bumped his head".

(I just held back what I was going to say - and will leave it to the readers of this Blog to fill in the blanks. H.L.);

The letter then proceeds to the next topic: "Analysis of video-taped interview":

"This interview did not receive an admission, as it attempted to resolve an issue which Gagnon has apparently resolved in her mind. It attempted to generate empathy for the deceased, however, there is no indication that Gagnon truly bonded with the child. Gagnon did not refer to the child by name or as her son in this interview."

"To summarize, Gagnon's language indicates deception, lacks sufficient detail, lacks commitment to facts, and evades issues. She avoided telling the truth by stating what usually happens instead of what did happen. She contradicted herself in sentences like"I put him down for a long nap that was unusually short";"

"She said that she tried to put him down for another nap, indicating that she was unsuccessful. She mentioned that he cried and whined during the day, and didn't want to go to sleep, or go into his high chair, suggesting possible sources of irritation for her. (This irritation is reflected in the letter in the coffin by references to conduct.)"


"Deception is indicated by changes in pronouns towards the child; the mouth V his mouth and the eyes V his eyes. Deception is also noted regarding the child crying, where Gagnon said "it just stopped".

"It is unlikely the bump on the child's head could have risen between the time of the alleged contact with the sewing table, and death. Gagnon referred to it as "that incident" which is characteristic of a deceptive and involved person minimizing the event".

"I missed a seminar of school with him," shows distance between her and the child. Gagnon didn't deny involvement after a positive confrontation by police, that she was responsible for the death, and didn't adamantly defend herself, or deny the "mistake analogy."

"Gagnon offered information consistent with the forensic findings of asphyxial death by stating, "I didn't cover his face and choke him". This has not been said by others, and I believe it may indicate the means by which the child died".

(YeS, we know about those forensic findings, don't we? H.L.)

"Gagnon continually covered her face, shielded her eyes, and avoided contact with the interviewer with her posture, indicating evasiveness. She suggested she had difficulty remembering what she said to police a year and a half ago,rather than relying on the actual memory of what occurred approximately eight months previous. Truthful people are expected to accurately recount details from important events in their life with only some minor discrepancies."

(Of course! Especially when they have been sand-bagged by the police for an unscheduled interview - without any lawyer or parents present - and confronted with allegations that they are responsible for the death of their child. Absolutely! H.L.)

"In the post interview comments to her fiance, she admitted that maybe she did have something to do with it, but didn't know for sure. (How could he have not wondered whether the horror of the situation made her wonder if she could have been responsible for her very own son's death? H.L.) She stated, "I guess everything is over, no shower, no wedding, no nothing." This appears to be more a primary focus than the unresolved death of her child".

On to the topic of "Personality Assessment."

"Information about Lianne Gagnon suggests she is spoiled by her parents, and immature for a twenty-three year old female. She is well-socialized, intelligent, secretive about close personal matters (Aren't the rest of us? H.L.), has a capacity for anger, competitive, with a frequent need for recreation and stimulation. (How incriminating! H.L.) She has high personal standards for herself, and others, and set personal goals that may have been compromised by the necessities of her single parent situation. Resentment of the child would be possible in this situation, with a strong emotional reaction likely result in periods of frustration".

(So much for single parents! (H.L.)

Last section: Investigative suggestions:

"The following idea is suggested for consideration by investigators and supervisors in light of the fact that conventional investigative methods have failed or are likely to fail".

(Perhaps because she might be innocent? H.L.)

Authorized consensual interception of private communications;

"In light of the continued communication, and attempts to obtain information and intelligence by Gagnon, from her former boyfriend and biological father of the child, we suggest that an affidavit under section 184.2 of the Criminal Code be presented to a Provincial Division judge".

"To this end, the ex-boyfriend if agreeable, should be taken into confidence, and participate in a conversation designed to elicit a confession of the truth from Gagnon. We note that Gagnon planned to marry on 02 August, 1997. The preceding period, in conjunction with waiting for the police investigation to conclude will be a very emotional period for her. This should be added to, by orchestrated events by police. If the ex-boy-friend continues to be supportive, trusted, and a potential source of information concerning the investigation, Gagnon may be inclined to disclose to him. Should the events not occur during this period, a significant advantage may be lost".

"Lack of contact with the investigator on annual leave, promise of forthcoming forensic results, and "sudden developments" in the investigation, and renewed police contacts to generate conversation in the final week of July, may be sufficient to cause Gagnon to disclose the truth. The ex-boyfriend must appear to have some type of importance to her, and aligned with her rather than police."

"The letter winds up with a standard offer of continuing assistance and the provision of relevant contact information".

Next Posting: "Part Six: Interrogation of an innocent mother;" How Sudbury police take Van Allan's suggestions to heart and enlists Nicholas' father in a wiretap operation targeting Lianne Gagnon.

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;