CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #10

[Salem]

Please continue here.

Remember: It is against TOS to accuse innocent people of crimes. If your sleuthing leads you to speculate, you must speculate and post responsibly. There must be some basis in fact, as we know them from LE or MSM, for the speculation. Wild speculation is NOT allowed. YOU are RESPONSIBLE for the words you post.

1. Do not accuse others.

2. Do not NAME innocent people that have not been named by MSM or LE. Use their initials. If your comments amount to speculation, then use initials. Name calling and name variations are NOT allowed, so don't try to make up some nickname. Just use initials.

3. If you have questions or concerns, PM a mod. Don't discuss it in the thread - just send a note to a Mod and they will take care of it.

4. As always, if a post offends you, alert it and the let the Mods handle it. Do NOT take it upon yourself to address it in the thread, because that will just result in repercussions for you.


NOTE: Threads 5 and 6 have been pulled for review. The threads may, or may not be returned depending upon the review.

Thanks,

Salem

Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3
Thread #4
Thread #5
Thread #6
Thread #7

Thread #8


Canada - Audrey Gleave, Ancaster, Dec. 2010 *** MEDIA/TIMELINES ***NO DISCUSSION*** - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[bessie]

Please continue the discussion here.

Audrey Gleave

Related Links:

Sillybilly's Timeline


Who is Audrey Gleave

By John Wells, The Spec
September 17, 2011
She had always kept details of her past hidden, even from those close to her. For years she met for coffee every Wednesday with retired teacher friends from Westdale Secondary School. They had no idea that Audrey had herself attended Westdale.
While she was an enigmatic, quiet recluse, she also delighted in revving up her shiny white Camaro.

Audrey's Story continues

By John Wells, The Spec
September 19, 2011
No doubt Audrey, a deep thinker, had often wondered how things might have gone differently.

 

[dotr]

Cannot recall this article although it could be a re post..rbbm.
June 2011 by Nicole O'Reilly

Eccentric doesn’t equal murderer

Cold-case expert warns Gleave killer likely to strike again

www.hamiltonnews.com

''James Adcock, a professor, author and cold case expert who consults police in the United States, said police services investigating homicides often fall victim to “booby traps,” including tunnel vision.

DNA only solves about 30 per cent of cases, he added.

In his opinion, and without having read the police notes on the case, he said Scott doesn’t meet the profile of the murder.


People who behave oddly can be easy targets, he said.

Given the severity of Gleave’s beating and her extremely private and quiet lifestyle, Adcock believes the murder was done out of anger and was likely committed by someone she knew, someone who was watching her or someone with issues related to women.

Police need to go back and start again with the victim’s profile, he suggested. “If you know your victim, you know your murderer.”

In most homicide investigations, the killer is known to police within the first 30 days but may not be considered a suspect because they are nice or co-operative, he said.

Adcock warned that unless Gleave was murdered for a deeply personal reason, there is a likelihood the killer could strike again.
“This is not going to be the last,” he said.

Adcock also suggested police look for sexual assault cases in the area. There is a still-unexplained sexual component to Gleave’s murder.''

 

[FromGermany1]

I wish there was some way of obtaining old research papers from Audrey's days at Chalk River. Do we know the names of any of her team members? Gamma rays and baryon decay is what I'm interested in. She must have called herself "Baryon" for a reason.

I would like to point to Audrey's "mate" at the McMaster courses, who did know, what "Baryon" means and proudly told, AG was somewhat impressed by it. Initials JH? He ended one of his online stories (book) with the arrest of the barn-man (initials forgotten atm) and never added the man's release, which I found odd like some other details.
I wouldn't understand, how a man like him could have been able to enter the garage, though.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

That Adcock article above brings back some memories = "know your victim and you'll know your killer". I believe that wholeheartedly.

Another thing to consider is that IF Sonia, Shelley and Audrey are related cases, LE are highly reluctant to use the phrase 'serial killer' or 'are related' cases. LE never want to alarm the public.

And DID this attacker/killer simply stop after Audrey?

 

[Bobbi Pearl]

I think the only reason LE published the perp's identity in the CJ case, was because it seemed like it was pretty much a 'slam dunk' case, with the perp's semen having been found on CJ's underwear which was also found at the scene with her remains. .... and there is really no other explanation for that, other than... he'd had occasion to be doing that around her underwear... I think it doesn't have to 100% mean he was the killer, but the fact that he had been doing that at any point in time, was gruesome enough to let it out. He sure would've had difficulty explaining that away, had he still been alive. In other cases, such as say 'Marianne Schuett' (sp?).. police have thought they've known the perp for many years, but without a body and without evidence, they have not publicized his name... and to me, nor should they. To me, it seems unfair to make horrible accusations without absolute proof, even after death. The family still has to live with such accusations, which could be devastating. If alive, a perp would get a trial, and have to be found guilty, before being deemed guilty, so to reveal a name without that taking place, is going down a slippery slope, imo.

I would want to know too, personally,... but... those genealogy sites where people send in their DNA, and from which LE have discovered perps such as the killer of CJ.. they have changed all of that so that it now has to be an express permission granted by the owner of the DNA to allow LE to use it in that way. The last time (a long while ago) I read about that, it seemed that many did not sign up for that. I guess many people don't trust that method, and/or are afraid of accusations being made unfairly? Who knows?

I agree with you regarding cases where they have not found a body and do not have any DNA, my thought was DNA to compare when and where you can. No genealogy sites etc. and not to be used as a hunting tool for anyone alive. Two different things in my view.

Privacy is a very slippery slope, I guess my question is how do we find an acceptable medium/middle that we can use deceased individuals' DNA against criminal activities that DNA is available to compare to?

The MS case is one that is close to me, I grew up in this area and went to Kilbride school. I truly wish they could release who they believe is the culprit. Without doing so and no remains the case sits stagnant, LE are not "looking" for anyone else, retired LE with volunteer groups are attempting to use this person's movements and daily life to see if they can find remains. I bet if they released the name the public could help.

By not publishing his name what is truly being protected in the MS case? The family's shame and embarrassment? is that worth more than a life, a child's life, that childs family wondering where she rests after all these years? The suspect's family already knew he liked to control girls and sexually assault them, he went to prison for similar deeds, and this family could not be overly surprised at his actions IMO.

It often appears the killers and their families receive more respect and privacy than any victim or law-abiding citizen. If LE are that confident it was him, they were planning to arrest him, they should release that name to us. They did it with Sharin Morningstar, they found her remains and culprit DNA, they released him a suspect. To me this should be treated the same, he was a named suspect, they had enough to investigate him and arrest him, again IMO that should be public knowledge.

 

[Snoopster]

I'm thinking of Audrey today.

Surely there is some DNA evidence from the perp since there was a 'sexual component to the murder'.
Has Hamilton PD submitted it for genetic genealogy testing? If not, why not? Yes, there's a cost, but the cost is surely less than continued investigation for many years to come.