CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #5

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Response:

Chorley last year (late in the year) one of our members drove past the house and said it looked lile a "winter wonderland" with the snow on the surrounding trees. Sorry, I don't have the time at the moment to locate that post. :blushing:

I also asked our members if the trees were tall/large enough to hide a killer while he was waiting for AG to enter the garage. The response was YES!! Our WS member said it would have been pretty easy to hide oneself either before or after the killing.

Kindly pardon me for not having the exact link to show to you. But please believe me.......WS member(s) have confirmed that:
- the house still is there
- a couple purchased the house
- and the house is remote in that it's hidden behind trees.

You know, with our weather getting colder and with Christmas right around the corner eek I simply CANNOT get Audrey's murder off of my mind.

This case MUST be solved............lease:

 

[Chorley8]

Response:

Chorley last year (late in the year) one of our members drove past the house and said it looked lile a "winter wonderland" with the snow on the surrounding trees. Sorry, I don't have the time at the moment to locate that post. :blushing:

I also asked our members if the trees were tall/large enough to hide a killer while he was waiting for AG to enter the garage. The response was YES!! Our WS member said it would have been pretty easy to hide oneself either before or after the killing.

Kindly pardon me for not having the exact link to show to you. But please believe me.......WS member(s) have confirmed that:
- the house still is there
- a couple purchased the house
- and the house is remote in that it's hidden behind trees.

You know, with our weather getting colder and with Christmas right around the corner eek) I simply CANNOT get Audrey's murder off of my mind.

This case MUST be solved............lease:

Thanks and sorry for passing on misinfo about house being levelled.

If I understand your theory here Audrey drives into the garage and killer hides behind the trees and surprises her before she has time to close the door. (?)


I am very interested in your theory linking the 3 cases one question for now: if young AND close then - are you thinking there is some unknown link between the perp and the other two cases?

I read how you are narrowing down my broad swathe of suspects, very interesting.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Thanks and sorry for passing on misinfo about house being levelled.

If I understand your theory here Audrey drives into the garage and killer hides behind the trees and surprises her before she has time to close the door. (?) No, not really. I was just wondering if the killer could have hidden somewhere (before or after the killng). HOWEVER, I believe fully that AG KNEW her killer and willingly let him into the garage/house. So, I'm not suggesting a 'stranger killing'. LE has said that AG "knew her killer".


I am very interested in your theory linking the 3 cases one question for now: if young AND close then - are you thinking there is some unknown link between the perp and the other two cases? I think all three cases are linked simply because NONE has been solved. All took place between August and December 2010. Surely ONE case should be solved by now! So......why not?

I read how you are narrowing down my broad swathe of suspects, very interesting.Well LE has said that AG knew her killer; there was no forced entry; there IS someone who "had discrepencies in his polygraph"; many things we've been told (by a potential suspect) do NOT make logical sense.

My responses are within the quoted post.

 

[roseofsharon]

Response:

Chorley last year (late in the year) one of our members drove past the house and said it looked lile a "winter wonderland" with the snow on the surrounding trees. Sorry, I don't have the time at the moment to locate that post. :blushing:

I also asked our members if the trees were tall/large enough to hide a killer while he was waiting for AG to enter the garage. The response was YES!! Our WS member said it would have been pretty easy to hide oneself either before or after the killing.

Kindly pardon me for not having the exact link to show to you. But please believe me.......WS member(s) have confirmed that:
- the house still is there
- a couple purchased the house
- and the house is remote in that it's hidden behind trees.

You know, with our weather getting colder and with Christmas right around the corner eek I simply CANNOT get Audrey's murder off of my mind.

This case MUST be solved............lease:

Hi No Stone:seeya: Yes, I drove by in the winter and it was just gorgeous. I did post (I think it was approximately near the end of August) again, drove by A's. The house only appeared to be under renovations. I think the original home was wood siding and it was all pulled away (frontal view of property).

The perp definitely could have hid in the trees sweeping across the front of the property. I would describe that area as a small forest.

Personally, I would have been very nervous living there alone or even with someone. I suppose it is all what you are used to though.

Indian Trail is beautiful though!

IMO

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Hi roseofsharon. I also would have been leary about living there alone (or even with someone) simply because of the remote, treed-in location.

That said.....I wouldn't be afraid of a lunatic on the loose right now. LE has said that AG knew her killer, there was no forced entry and he's someone young and close. He had access to her place.

Now, if I lived in that area, I'd have an alarm system throughout the house and I'd NEVER give my garage code to anyone (except my husband). If handimen/workmen want the garage to be opened......they'd have to ring my doorbell and I'd open it myself.

Again, this all points to someone known to AG, someone who knows her habits, someone who was welcomed into the house/garage.

:moo:

 

[roseofsharon]

Hi roseofsharon. I also would have been leary about living there alone (or even with someone) simply because of the remote, treed-in location.

That said.....I wouldn't be afraid of a lunatic on the loose right now. LE has said that AG knew her killer, there was no forced entry and he's someone young and close. He had access to her place.

Now, if I lived in that area, I'd have an alarm system throughout the house and I'd NEVER give my garage code to anyone (except my husband). If handimen/workmen want the garage to be opened......they'd have to ring my doorbell and I'd open it myself.

Again, this all points to someone known to AG, someone who knows her habits, someone who was welcomed into the house/garage.

:moo:

For family reasons, over the past year, I have driven through Lynden once a month. You just can't drive through that intersection without thinking about AG, the last trip she made outside her home on that fateful day and how it appeared she was totally blindsided inside her own garage. It's so haunting.

I agree with everything you have said here and especially that AG knew her killer. The perp had to have known every detail about the property, the house and AG and HER dogs!

I'm still puzzled as to where flower beds were planted. Even at the time of A's murder, I couldn't see, in any pictures, where a flower bed/garden was planted.

IMO

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Quoted from roseofsharon:

I'm still puzzled as to where flower beds were planted. Even at the time of A's murder, I couldn't see, in any pictures, where a flower bed/garden was planted.



Totally agree. Now, I'm thinking that there WERE NO flower beds. I'm thinking it was merely a story we were told - perhaps to embellish someone's 'relationship' with AG.

:moo:

 

[Chorley8]

Quoted from roseofsharon:

I'm still puzzled as to where flower beds were planted. Even at the time of A's murder, I couldn't see, in any pictures, where a flower bed/garden was planted.



Totally agree. Now, I'm thinking that there WERE NO flower beds. I'm thinking it was merely a story we were told - perhaps to embellish someone's 'relationship' with AG.

:moo:

I think someone has asked this before but wouldn't LE have compared DNA in the the three cases SV SL and AG already?

Despite my recent analysis of his statements I don't see that the details lead only to that one suspect. It could just as easily be a small conspiracy with financial or 'political' (really technological) motives. Because the key point we are forgetting is that the DNA does NOT link to the suspect. I realize we don't know DNA from what? So maybe we have to run through the possibility of a hired killer as well could just be a friend of somebody or a relative.

I have a question: if government in any of its more powerful manifestations (ok I need to be more specific so say CSIS) asks LE in any jurisdiction including the RCMP to lay off (or even confuse?) a case would they feel obliged to do so? That question is on the tip of my tongue in a couple of cases I am interested in. (I have been afraid to ask because I realize the question can send important discussions like this one out the window. I intend this just as a 'practical" question).

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

I think someone has asked this before but wouldn't LE have compared DNA in the the three cases SV SL and AG already? Yes, LE would have compared DNA with the other cases. However, LE isn't telling us anything. All we know is that NONE of the cases has been solved!

Despite my recent analysis of his statements I don't see that the details lead only to that one suspect. It could just as easily be a small conspiracy with financial or 'political' (really technological) motives. Because the key point we are forgetting is that the DNA does NOT link to the suspect. I realize we don't know DNA from what? So maybe we have to run through the possibility of a hired killer as well could just be a friend of somebody or a relative.I highly doubt there was a hired killer. And we DO NOT know what kind (if any??) of DNA LE has in the AG case. We do know (from LE) that AG KNEW her killer and there was no forced entry.

I have a question: if government in any of its more powerful manifestations (ok I need to be more specific so say CSIS) asks LE in any jurisdiction including the RCMP to lay off (or even confuse?) a case would they feel obliged to do so? That question is on the tip of my tongue in a couple of cases I am interested in. (I have been afraid to ask because I realize the question can send important discussions like this one out the window. I intend this just as a 'practical" question).Oh, I don't have a clue! I do know that LE are very territorial about their cases. But this is not CSIS. It's a local murder and LE in Hamilton is using the FBI and I hope the RCMP. (Just my opinion.....)

Responses are within the quoted post.

 

[roseofsharon]

The DNA must be from a male speciman, since DLS was initially charged with the muder of AG, however, LE has not released the source of the DNA, i.e. blood, saliva, etc., so it could be possible that a female is the perp and could have collected and deposited a male DNA sample at the crime scene.

We know that AG visited the Lynden library on a regular basis, but was wondering if she had any affiliations with the local Lynden schools, either public or high school?

IMO, I still believe the motive for the murder is money. AG did not leave a huge bank roll, which makes me think she may have loaned someone money, had perhaps said in the new year, she would need to set up a repayment plan with the person and it didn't sit well.

All just IMO.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

About the DNA - was there DNA involved when LE picked up DLS? Something tells me NO.

IF there is DNA from a male, why would PK be a suspect and have to undergo the polygraph? Wouldn't DNA shut the case completely?

As for a female killer - I'm sorry, I just cannot see it. :dunno:

Now, what if AG had a child....a son....and he came back to seek revenge for not having his biological mother in his life?

Oh let's face it.....I'm grabbing at straws here!

 

[bodhi93]

About the DNA - was there DNA involved when LE picked up DLS? Something tells me NO.

IF there is DNA from a male, why would PK be a suspect and have to undergo the polygraph? Wouldn't DNA shut the case completely?

As for a female killer - I'm sorry, I just cannot see it. :dunno:

Now, what if AG had a child....a son....and he came back to seek revenge for not having his biological mother in his life?

Oh let's face it.....I'm grabbing at straws here!

According to DLS' lawyer in this article LE doesn't have any DNA... but I could have sworn that when DLS was released they (LE) said that it was because the DNA didn't match... The reason that I remember this is because I questioned whether there was DNA found at the scene or if they were checking DLS' knife for some of AG's DNA... I'm trying to find that article now... will post if I can find it... some of the articles that look like they referenced this are no longer available...


http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/03/charge-dropped-in-killing-of-exteacher

He wouldn’t comment when asked if that means there wasn’t any DNA linking the suspect to the scene.

“I can’t go there, what that evidence was, because it’s part of the case and it’s still an open case,” Stewart said.

Scott’s lawyer, Charles Spettigue, said police had no DNA.

“We’re been poring through mountains of disclosure ... and the police have been flailing about trying to find some evidence to theoretically carry on with this,” he said. “The simple reality is they never had any evidence. They have no DNA, they have no-nothing.”

 

[Woodland]

Just a small note on the kind of bank roll AG left - we only know what was disclosed in the probate records for her Will, which is $50,000 other than her property value.

That does not make it true and accurate - the value could have been much higher with the excuse not all information was available at the time the Will was probated. According to my lawyer, Wills are more or less rubber stamped when presented if no other Will is put forward.

 

[Chorley8]

Just to document: the Hamilton Spectator (newspaper) bridge games I referred to in a post couple of weeks ago have now been taken down from on-line perusal.

 

[Sillybilly]

According to DLS' lawyer in this article LE doesn't have any DNA... but I could have sworn that when DLS was released they (LE) said that it was because the DNA didn't match... The reason that I remember this is because I questioned whether there was DNA found at the scene or if they were checking DLS' knife for some of AG's DNA... I'm trying to find that article now... will post if I can find it... some of the articles that look like they referenced this are no longer available...


http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/03/charge-dropped-in-killing-of-exteacher

IIRC, LE said to the effect that the "forensic evidence" didn't match DLS but they did not specify DNA. We had discussion about it at the time .. i'll try to find it.

ETA: Here's my old post on the matter, so there should be other convo around that post (sorry, i don't have time to look back for it all). Wish i'd given a link to Hrab's comments in my old post, but it'll be out there somewhere.

OKAY, so i took the time (not Hrab, but the Superintendent)

from:
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/03/charge-dropped-in-killing-of-exteacher

Hamilton Police Supt. Bill Stewart said the forensic evidence didn’t come back with the “conclusive results we were hoping for.”

He wouldn’t comment when asked if that means there wasn’t any DNA linking the suspect to the scene.

“I can’t go there, what that evidence was, because it’s part of the case and it’s still an open case,” Stewart said.

 

[Sillybilly]

In line with D.'s recent comment here on the possibly symbolism of the purse note he does not mention the wounds or the evidence of the missing body part (assuming that is what we are talking about) but notes she "did not have her purse".

<rsbm>

There was no mention of a missing body part ... it was that there were items missing from the home, and there was a sexual component to the crime, but not necessarily that the missing "items" were body parts.

Now, when we combine LE double-speak and the sensitive nature of an assault against a senior citizen, it could be they were dancing around that particular issue out of respect for the deceased, and/or leaving it as holdback for future investigative purposes.

 

[Chorley8]

<rsbm>

There was no mention of a missing body part ... it was that there were items missing from the home, and there was a sexual component to the crime, but not necessarily that the missing "items" were body parts.

Now, when we combine LE double-speak and the sensitive nature of an assault against a senior citizen, it could be they were dancing around that particular issue out of respect for the deceased, and/or leaving it as holdback for future investigative purposes.

Yes you're right of course: I think it was in particular one quote in the Spectator articles and then the blog of Lee Mellor (sp?) that led me to try an analysis of his language from that point of view. I will find the quote but it could be inadvertent on the part of the Spec writer. I think it was clear that my analysis was experimental. However I think it is Hrab's one in a hundred comment that is leading this speculation because while I have no idea what homicides he has overseen you would think a homicide where someone was stabbed and beaten would not be overly unusual.

Actually my own pet theory leads in another direction than P.K. and involves him being mildly 'set up" to find A.G. I favour the financial motive with now political second and the sex maniac theory third.

Still trying to parse LE's words with the following but what else do we have to work with?: the sexual component seems rather removed and an afterthought and may be deliberate to get LE barking up the wrong tree which they did.

I will find the Spec quote later today.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Yes, I only recall LE saying there were things missing from the house but they only said there was a sexual component.

For some unknown reason, I don't think the killer took a body part. Mutilation, horrible things - yes. But I highly doubt a body part was taken.

Just a niggling feeling I have......

:moo:

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Regarding Hrab:

He DID say that 'this was the most horrific crime he'd seen in his 20 years of policing'. I tend to believe him because:

- of the gruesome nature of the case

- it was against a defenseless, elderly woman.

:moo:

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

My own theories (for what it's worth):

1. The killer was known to Audrey.

2. The killer was well aware of how to meet up with AG (in the garage).

3. The killer had been to her house many times previously.

4. The killer is extremely inteligent AND cunning.

5. The killer is right in front of our noses.....walking around daily as if nothing has happened.

6. The killer is respectable - the wife, the kids, the house, the job, from a good family......you know, "the guy next door" type.

Did any of that make sense?

:waitasec: