CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #7

[No_Stone_Unturned]

I vaguely recall seeing the windows. But I do remember seeing LE hoisting the car onto a police truck to take it to forensics.

From the pic of LE taking the car away, I recall the car looked pristine....as usual.

:twocents:

 

[Pink Panther]

I read in a much older thread that Audrey went to Westdale secondary school and yet none of her friends knew this. She got married at 16, is it possible that in doing so, she dropped out for a couple of years and thereby graduated at an older age? Could she have been embarrassed by this? Also - does anyone know what public school she went to?

 

[Pink Panther]

But didn't she have a double garage door set? We have that and our two remotes open either one door or the other. Not both!! And the code only opens ONE garage door. In order to have the code open the other garage door, we'd have to set it to a different code.

I forget, did Audrey have a double garage door?

:blushing:

Oh and speaking of 'having family' I wonder who did LV's lawn/snow work. Who did the lawn/snow work for the woman across the street from Audrey? I mean LF. Maybe her son, but LV doesn't have a son......does she?

If you go to this link and to post #142, there are photographs of the garage:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124074&page=6

 

[2soccermom]

Quoted from Pink Panther:
<<< I find it strange that a 16 year-old boy starts hanging out at a 67 year-old woman's house. >>>

Yes, I've thought of that as well......long ago.
We have a young guy (late 20's) who mows our lawn and clears our snow..... No extra-friendly relationship develops.
:twocents:

RSBM

I don't find this odd at all. I guess it's one particular world view to think folks of different ages can't be friends or to consider that people who do odd jobs to help someone have to remain at some kind of distance -- like they're "the help." But that is not a view shared by many, many people in my own experience, and there doesn't have to be anything necessarily untoward about such relationships. I wouldn't say there can't be abusive or appropriative relationships between differently-aged people any more than I would say that about ANY potential relationship formation. But why in itself would the nature of their relationship seem odd? Audrey and PK shared a love of science. He helped her with things she needed and she trusted him with things she didn't share with other people. The relationship was evidently meaningful to her; Audrey seemed to like to speak of her young friend (cf., for example, her comments about wanting only "the best" for her young friend's wedding and telling her photographer-friend his equipment wasn't good enough for PK's wedding, etc, in the Jon Wells story and/or the blogger who took the computer class with her). Myself, I imagine PK took on the odd jobs initially both out of kindness to help Audrey as a single senior and to pick up a little extra money as a student/grad student. But (and I say this a bit gently, meant with no offense to the posters here): I might find it a bit insulting to Audrey's memory if we assume PK couldn't have developed genuine respect and friendship out of the time he spent with her. MOO.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Quoted from Pink Panther:

<<< does anyone know what public school she went to? >>>
________________


Isn't that funny - I'm not sure we ever knew!! All I recall is her high school.... both as a student and as a teacher.

Good points!!

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

If you go to this link and to post #142, there are photographs of the garage:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124074&page=6

:tyou:

 

[Pink Panther]

Quoted from Pink Panther:

<<< does anyone know what public school she went to? >>>
________________


Isn't that funny - I'm not sure we ever knew!! All I recall is her high school.... both as a student and as a teacher.

Good points!!

Westdale Secondary School is in Westdale Village and is fairly close to the Doveika's 11 Beulah Avenue address (at the time). If we assume that they were living at the same address when Audrey was in Elementary School then, she most likely went to Earl Kitchener Elementary school which was very close to her home. (It is walking distance from Beulah Ave.)

Westdale Secondary School:
700 Main St W *Hamilton, ON L8S 1A5
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westdale_Secondary_School

Earl Kitchener Elementary School:
300 Dundurn Street South, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 4L3

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2266105-namesakes-earl-kitchener/

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/sift/schoolProfile.asp?SCH_NUMBER=158151

I don't have the courage to call to ask if she was enrolled there. Maybe someone else will?

 

[Pink Panther]

I think that the closest middle school at the time was the Old Ryerson Middle School:

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2243778--ryerson-middle-school-/
222 Robinson Street, Hamilton ON, L8P 1Z9

 

[LeftCoaster]

I don't find this odd at all. I guess it's one particular world view to think folks of different ages can't be friends or to consider that people who do odd jobs to help someone have to remain at some kind of distance -- like they're "the help." But that is not a view shared by many, many people in my own experience, and there doesn't have to be anything necessarily untoward about such relationships. I wouldn't say there can't be abusive or appropriative relationships between differently-aged people any more than I would say that about ANY potential relationship formation. But why in itself would the nature of their relationship seem odd? Audrey and PK shared a love of science. He helped her with things she needed and she trusted him with things she didn't share with other people. The relationship was evidently meaningful to her; Audrey seemed to like to speak of her young friend (cf., for example, her comments about wanting only "the best" for her young friend's wedding and telling her photographer-friend his equipment wasn't good enough for PK's wedding, etc, in the Jon Wells story and/or the blogger who took the computer class with her). Myself, I imagine PK took on the odd jobs initially both out of kindness to help Audrey as a single senior and to pick up a little extra money as a student/grad student. But (and I say this a bit gently, meant with no offense to the posters here): I might find it a bit insulting to Audrey's memory if we assume PK couldn't have developed genuine respect and friendship out of the time he spent with her. MOO.

:goodpost::tyou: 2soccermom!

I am sorry to see the thread drifting back toward speculation about PK. For heaven's sake, Audrey was a high-school teacher for decades, and took continuing ed in computers. Forgive the repetition:deadhorse:, but she would have interacted with many young men, and only because PK was the individual who was unfortunate enough to discover / be discovered with her body, is he the one under the magnifying glass:sleuth:. Given that husband #3 was several years younger than Audrey and they met at university, it seems reasonable that she simply had an affinity for young men. PK's and Audrey's friendship quite likely did take shape over the period of time that he worked as her handyman. JMO.

 

[Pink Panther]

:goodpost::tyou: 2soccermom!

I am sorry to see the thread drifting back toward speculation about PK. For heaven's sake, Audrey was a high-school teacher for decades, and took continuing ed in computers. Forgive the repetition:deadhorse:, but she would have interacted with many young men, and only because PK was the individual who was unfortunate enough to discover / be discovered with her body, is he the one under the magnifying glass:sleuth:. Given that husband #3 was several years younger than Audrey and they met at university, it seems reasonable that she simply had an affinity for young men. PK's and Audrey's friendship quite likely did take shape over the period of time that he worked as her handyman. JMO.

You're most likely correct but it doesn't mean that one can't find it odd. I do...She let virtually no one into her life. Even her "closest friend" who was the executor/main recipient of her will had only stepped into Audrey's house once or twice! This same woman was bringing her soup shortly before she wasn't killed and was allowed into the house!

moo

ETA - Audrey's case remains unsolved.

 

[2soccermom]

Thanks LeftCoaster

I get what you're saying Pink Panther. Audrey seems like she was "guarded." But the fact that she was very selective about who she let into her life and vigilant about her privacy says as much to me about possible fears from her past as to the effect of a "reclusive" personality trait (as the media keeps trying to persuade us). I keep returning to her disclosure of certainty, assuming this is the truth of her claim to her BOI, that she would be sexually assaulted and murdered in her home. I know some people here believe that was a premonition; others, that a specific someone or something in Audrey's life placed her under particular threat. Regardless of how we might differently see her highly unusual and prescient claim, I'm just suggesting that it's not perforce the same thing to be careful and private on the one hand and unable to form close attachments on the other. Audrey by all accounts was the former -- it's an equivalence to the latter about which I'm much less certain. MOO.

 

[dotr]

These are a few things that were different/new prior to Audrey's murder.Just after typing that, realized each one of these things involves opening and closing something fwiw.

new car
new oven
vandalized mailbox
missed Christmas dinner
sent unusual song

 

[Chorley8]

Just read of two cases in US where two young women had the injury the banned post had mentioned - not to be fair we have suggested similar things as well just that that post had said they were informing us of a rumour i.e. it wasn't just there speculation taken from LE's enigmatic words - so it got removed cause of rules around rumours.

But it go me thinking: I think if there is some injury of a sexual kind any body part kind and a trophy taken then we would have to surmise deep sexual perversity as the central motive.

I think I have underestimated that. Not sure why. See Dotrs recent post around things that open or close also things with interiors and exteriors etc.

Jealousy/envy may come under another banner, but might also be in a category of its own.
Audrey seemed to be a whiz at everything she put her mind to, she was even brilliant at predicting her own awful end, brilliant in her choice and timing to send the bitter-sweet song, Amazing Grace.
Audrey had her mind, dogs, interests, friends,home, dream car, financial security, respect and clever people to help her if she wanted.
Someone was very bothered by all that.jmo.

 

[Pink Panther]

Just read of two cases in US where two young women had the injury the banned post had mentioned - not to be fair we have suggested similar things as well just that that post had said they were informing us of a rumour i.e. it wasn't just there speculation taken from LE's enigmatic words - so it got removed cause of rules around rumours.

But it go me thinking: I think if there is some injury of a sexual kind any body part kind and a trophy taken then we would have to surmise deep sexual perversity as the central motive.

I think I have underestimated that. Not sure why. See Dotrs recent post around things that open or close also things with interiors and exteriors etc.

What is the "injury the banned post had mentioned"? I have no idea what you are talking about?

We have no indication that AG was mutilated at all. We know that LE suggested a "sexual component" to the crime and much speculation HERE that there was a "trophy" of some kind but NO basis of fact.

I'm confused.

???

moo

 

[Pink Panther]

:goodpost::tyou: 2soccermom!

I am sorry to see the thread drifting back toward speculation about PK. For heaven's sake, Audrey was a high-school teacher for decades, and took continuing ed in computers. Forgive the repetition:deadhorse:, but she would have interacted with many young men, and only because PK was the individual who was unfortunate enough to discover / be discovered with her body, is he the one under the magnifying glass:sleuth:. Given that husband #3 was several years younger than Audrey and they met at university, it seems reasonable that she simply had an affinity for young men. PK's and Audrey's friendship quite likely did take shape over the period of time that he worked as her handyman. JMO.

The thread is not "drifting back toward speculation about PK". I simply said that I thought it strange that a 16 year old boy would become the closest friend of a woman in her seventies. I still do. That's it. I do find it strange. I don't mean to imply anything untoward but I do find it odd/strange/bizarre that this boy had access to her home when her friend of 30 years didn't.

Call me strange. Call me stupid. I think it's odd.

I also find it odd that her third husband found out her real name by accident.

There you go.

What on earth was this woman hiding? And why? And maybe, maybe not - it has something to do with the way she (unfortunately) died...

moo

 

[Pink Panther]

These are a few things that were different/new prior to Audrey's murder.Just after typing that, realized each one of these things involves opening and closing something fwiw.

new car
new oven
vandalized mailbox
missed Christmas dinner
sent unusual song

I'm left with the impression that Audrey got a new car every once in a while.
Maybe her oven was old and needed to be replaced.
Maybe some local kids were doing silly things on a Friday night.
Maybe she really did feel sick.
Maybe she liked the recording.

I don't see an "opening and closing" theme.

???

moo

 

[Pink Panther]

Who gets married at 16? And why? (Put aside 1953 - how about in 2013)???


tick tock


tick tock

A pregnant girl or a girl that wants to escape her dysfunctional family.

Any other reason? (Maybe I'm missing something?)

Did her parents sign a consent for her to be married? She was still a minor wasn't she? Doesn't the law require them to do so?

moo

 

[greenthumb]

What is the "injury the banned post had mentioned"? I have no idea what you are talking about?

We have no indication that AG was mutilated at all. We know that LE suggested a "sexual component" to the crime and much speculation HERE that there was a "trophy" of some kind but NO basis of fact.

I'm confused.

???

moo

PP, there was a post removed that had shared a rumour about a possible mutilation of AG's body, and I believe that is what was being referenced by 'the banned post'. HTH

WRT speculation about mutilation - I believe it arises from Jon Well's book here http://books.google.ca/books?id=JY4S4jY8U6kC&pg=PA108&lpg=PA108&dq=jon+wells+audrey+gleave+book&source=bl&ots=0RtJWXGSjH&sig=REwPfHgM904Mnpavmr9fZokBlbo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=PHG6UejeKcXCqgGFwoHIDw&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=jon%20wells%20audrey%20gleave%20book&f=false page 107 -

or the nature of the "sexual component" - it had included a perverse act that went beyond conventional assault; the killer had taken something from the victim, as though making off with a souvenir.

This excerpt has been discussed in these threads - some members interpret it to mean that the perverse sexual act was the removal of (a) body part(s) which was taken as a souvenir. Others feel the excerpt contains two separate and independent thoughts - one being about a perverse sexual component and the other, that there was also a souvenir taken from the victim (unrelated to the sexual component).

I can understand both points of view, and believe the meaning can be taken quite differently, depending upon how one 'reads' the punctuation in Jon Well's writing.

All JMO, and HTH! Nice to see some 'fresh eyes' looking at AG's threads - you are questioning so many things that others have, and unfortunately answers have been in rather short supply. AG was a bit of a mystery woman, and I think she not only liked it that way, she insisted on it! JMO

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

PP, this "drifting back to PK" notion is also confusing to me. And WHY should we NOT 'drift back to him'?

FACTS:

- he's an admitted Person Of Interest

- he's admitted there were 'inconsistencies in his polygraph'

- DLS was let go

- there doesn't seem to be any link to TB and the car/truck/vehicles case

I agree completely that AG was hiding something. Or at least, not speaking about it to anyone.

But the bottom line is that Audrey was murdered and her killer has not been caught.

I'd love to have the killer caught and punished.

POSSIBLE KILLERS:

- a lunatic on the loose?

- a previous student of hers.......but WHY?

- a previous husband of hers.....but WHY?

QUESTIONS:

- who all else are Persons Of Interest?

- who else had inconsistencies in their polygraphs?

- who else was young and close?

- who else could gain entry without force?

- who had the garage code?

The biggest thing we seem to be missing is motive.

OK, I'll :lurk: to see the responses to my post.

:twocents:

 

[greenthumb]

PP, this "drifting back to PK" notion is also confusing to me. And WHY should we NOT 'drift back to him'?

FACTS:

- he's an admitted Person Of Interest

- he's admitted there were 'inconsistencies in his polygraph'

RSBM

IIRC, the only evidence we have that PK is a POI, comes from his own understanding of why LE re-interviewed him, as I believe they did all persons related to AG's murder case after DLS's release. But perhaps I missed another source, other than Jon Well's quoting PK as saying that's what he understood - do we have any other evidence that LE stated that PK was a POI?

LE indicating to him that there were inconsistencies in his polygraph is a common interrogation technique - they suggest those inconsistencies to gauge the person's reaction to a supposed 'failure' on the polygraph and to apply pressure. It is a documented technique, including at this link - http://www.ap-ls.org/links/confessions.pdf

Concerns about the polygraph are illustrative in this regard. Although it is best
known for its use as a lie-detector test, and has value as an investigative tool, posttest
"failure" feedback is often used to pressure suspects and can prompt false confessions.
This problem is so common that Lykken (1998) coined the term “fourth degree” to
describe the tactic (p. 235), and the National Research Council Committee to Review the
Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph (2003) warned of the risk of polygraph-induced
false confessions.

BBM

So, PK's statement that he was told that there were inconsistencies in his polygraph, in and of itself, is not conclusive evidence that he lied or was hiding anything, IMO.

Also, given that DLS was released based on not matching specific forensic evidence, we know that such evidence exists. Presumably, LE would compare such evidence for a match to any other POI's and if a match was identified, lay charges. No charges have been brought against PK - so my deduction is that LE is in possession of forensic evidence that does not match PK.

By my reasoning, and based on the information available to us at this time, I think that forensic evidence was left at the murder scene by someone other than PK. And I would very much like to know who that was.