This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Stanley James Tippett
- Convicted of multiple criminal counts
- Proposed designation as dangerous offender. Only approx. 360 people in Canada have ever been designated a dangerous offender and can be jail indefinitely.
- Convicted of sexual assault and kidnapping
- Prime suspect in the kidnapping of murder of first Tamil Canadian teenager
- Over 1,920,000 hits on Google for Stanley James Tippett
I understand the advances in DNA now can reveal information regarding DNA found on sexual assault victim and provide better details on DNA of two men in this assault. The DNA procedures used now can provide accurate results as prior results I understand were inconclusive.
The crown if looking for perpetrators and not just a person to lay blame on should be noted that the DNA evidence is withheld from additional more accurate results identifying the TWO men who's DNA was collected from scene.
If Tippett were responsible then what are the courts withholding DNA from more recent research.
At best there is one guilty man on the loose where more likely the two as MR TIPPETT STTATED DURING TRIAL.
ARE WE NOT INNOCENT TIL PROVER GUILTY?
IS IT RIGHT TO HOLD AN INNOCENT MAN FOR CRIMES HE DID NOT COMMIT BECAUSE OF A VISUAL DEFECT THAT MAKES HIM LOOK LIKE NOT ACT LIKE A CRIMINAL.
DNA MUST BE RELEASED TO PROVIDE THE REAL CRIMINALS AN EQUAL CHANCE AT PAYING FOR THEIR SEXUAL ENCOUNTERS THAT WERE NEVER POSSIBLE WITH OLD TECHNOLOGY.
PLEASE BE FAIR TO HUMANKIND AND RELEASE DNA TO PUT THIS MATTER TO REST.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH FINDING STANLEY IS AN INNOCENT MAN IF HE IS AS HIS WORD WAS NOT ENOUGH AND PRIOR INVESTIGATION I UNDERSTAND COULD NOT CONFIRM BUT COULD NOT PROVIDE CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF MR TIPPETTS DNA BEINGG PRESENT.
LET GET IT STRAIGHT AND PUT THE MATTER TO REST IN A FAIR AND NON PREJUDICE MANNER. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.119.235.177 (talk) 08:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
