CANADA Canada - Elizabeth Bain, 22, Scarborough, Ont, 19 June 1990 #2

[eyesonly]

on a side note, who would somebody talk to regarding this case if they wanted to provide more information?

I think it depends on the info as to who. <modsnip>

 

[Woodland]

Toronto Police are dicey depending on your info - they are still facing a pricey lawsuit and will not budge on their original theory.

The Association for the Wrongly Convicted might work - depending on the implication of your info.

Or the OPP if they are willing to get involved.

If everyone turns you down - WS?

 

[JusticeWillBeServed]

on a side note, who would somebody talk to regarding this case if they wanted to provide more information?

I remember reading this interview with private investigator Brian King. He worked on overturning the conviction against RB. He said:

&#8220;Believe it or not, the Baltovich case continues behind the scenes. My dream is to eventually find the evidence that will prove who killed Elizabeth Bain.&#8221;

It might be worth contacting him, if possible.

http://www.justmag.ca/spring2015/fea_devotedToJustice_spring2015.html

 

[eyesonly]

Here is a list I can get you or anyone in contact with.
1) LE, however woodland is bang on regarding their interest.
2)Brian King, (hasn't really been involved in the investigation part of the case for several years, but if the info is substantial enough, I would hope he would take a statement, we can only ask)
3)Aidwyc
4)Rb, can get your message to him, however he is unlikely to respond due to his ongoing lawsuit. But he would pass the info on to the proper ppl
4)JS from the book nctm,
5)JS and I have a news paper reporter and now the CBC/5th estate person collecting info on the case for future stories.
JS and I have never stopped searching for EB. We will follow up on any new info given, of that I can assure you.

Johnpaul, I pm'd you my email address and if anyone else would like it, please pm me.

It will be that tiny bit of information that someone thinks it could not possibly help, that will bring Elizabeth home.

 

[Woodland]

For June 19th, 1990, long distance records only.

1) from orange county fl to B home, at 7:52am for 4mins

2) from orange county fl to north port fl charged to B home, at 4:21pm for 2 mins

3) from orange county fl to St Petersburg fl, charged to B home, at 4:31pm, for 7 mins

4) from orange county fl to Toronto, charged to the B home, at 5pm, for 3mins. ( this is the phone call mr B made to national sports at cederbrae mall regarding the price of a tennis racket, as per his testimony)

That's all there is, and there are no long distance calls recorded on mb's phone for June 19th 1990, either incoming, outgoing, or charged to.

Let's try this - we know the main home phone was busy all evening - possibly beyond. Apparently no record showing any calls between Florida and Toronto at the B residence - both lines we know of.

Making long distance calls from one phone and charging them to another phone line is apparent if above reference is accurate.

Calls to/from Florida/Toronto on 19 and 20 June charged to sister C's home phone? She lived elsewhere.

 

[eyesonly]

Let's try this - we know the main home phone was busy all evening - possibly beyond. Apparently no record showing any calls between Florida and Toronto at the B residence - both lines we know of.

Making long distance calls from one phone and charging them to another phone line is apparent if above reference is accurate.

Calls to/from Florida/Toronto on 19 and 20 June charged to sister C's home phone? She lived elsewhere.

Sorry, when I stated the call was charged to the B home, I meant it was charged to their main line number.
Back in 1990, someone had to physically pick up the B resident phone and accept the charges for the call to go through.
JS has said the B's did not have any calling cards, not sure if they were even available back then.

I'm not sure if C's phone was still active or not, as she was living elsewhere at the time of the disappearance.
I'll try to find out

 

[Woodland]

I did realize the B home meant the main line.

Everyone had a calling card in 1990 - even if they didn't use it. They were especially useful for a family of 5 - safety was one aspect of the sales pitch - never be stuck anywhere etc. Not sure how anyone can speak with absolute knowledge a phone calling card did not exist in the B household.

No one had to be present to pick up the phone if charging to a line other than the one being used.

 

[eyesonly]

I did realize the B home meant the main line.

Everyone had a calling card in 1990 - even if they didn't use it. They were especially useful for a family of 5 - safety was one aspect of the sales pitch - never be stuck anywhere etc. Not sure how anyone can speak with absolute knowledge a phone calling card did not exist in the B household.

No one had to be present to pick up the phone if charging to a line other than the one being used.

No one has to be present if using a calling card you mean?
And agree with you that no one can be sure they didn't have a calling card if they were in effect.

Other than that, I remember making calls and charging to my home phone and someone had to be there to accept, because if not you could charge any call to anyone's number and run up as much as you want

 

[Woodland]

No one has to be present if using a calling card you mean?
And agree with you that no one can be sure they didn't have a calling card if they were in effect.

Other than that, I remember making calls and charging to my home phone and someone had to be there to accept, because if not you could charge any call to anyone's number and run up as much as you want

No one had to be present at an address when using a calling card - the card ID number was unique along with the phone number. Each family member could have a different unique ID number along with the phone number.

What about a place of employment? Where I worked in 1990 many of the employees traveled out of town on a regular basis - they all had calling cards to cut down on the cost of hotel phone calls to the office or home and eliminate the inconvenience of needing coins for a payphone. Senior staff did not always travel - but they had calling cards just in case.

 

[eyesonly]

on a side note, who would somebody talk to regarding this case if they wanted to provide more information?

Johnpaul, wondering if you've made any decisions yet. I'm sure we are all very curious.

 

[eyesonly]

No one had to be present at an address when using a calling card - the card ID number was unique along with the phone number. Each family member could have a different unique ID number along with the phone number.

What about a place of employment? Where I worked in 1990 many of the employees traveled out of town on a regular basis - they all had calling cards to cut down on the cost of hotel phone calls to the office or home and eliminate the inconvenience of needing coins for a payphone. Senior staff did not always travel - but they had calling cards just in case.

Woodland,
Regarding the long distance calls.
I asked JS this morning if he remembered if Mrs B told him someone answered the phone that night to accept the charges and this is his reply........

JS ....."No i think we used calling card numbers at that point"

Just got off the phone with JS as writing this post and he says that CB explained to him that one of the phones, when you hung it up would very often not hang up correctly thus leaving it off the hook so to speak and if anyone called there would be a busy signal. She said it happened all the time and that's prob why Rb and Egen got busy signals that night.

And that fits with Mr B having a calling card, because no one would have to answer the phone for the charges to go through

 

[Woodland]

Woodland,
Regarding the long distance calls.
I asked JS this morning if he remembered if Mrs B told him someone answered the phone that night to accept the charges and this is his reply........

JS ....."No i think we used calling card numbers at that point"

Just got off the phone with JS as writing this post and he says that CB explained to him that one of the phones, when you hung it up would very often not hang up correctly thus leaving it off the hook so to speak and if anyone called there would be a busy signal. She said it happened all the time and that's prob why Rb and Egen got busy signals that night.

And that fits with Mr B having a calling card, because no one would have to answer the phone for the charges to go through

CB claimed to someone a phone did not hang up properly - frequently - that caused the line to be unusable. And the household put up with this? Mr B said the busy signals were caused by some sort of interference.

I like the calling card thingy myself.

To refine my thought on what happened 19 June -

EB was suddenly dead in the home. Her car was moved and someone had the presence of mind to run to CB's and call Mr B in Florida - the calling card was put into play for any and all calls until he could get back the next day. Or call first, move car second. Doesn't matter.

The only record of using the calling card number would be on the bill for that number. No record on any other bill - it would be a duplicate.

 

[eyesonly]

Apparently the phone would catch in an odd way sometimes when hanging it up. I remember that kind of thing happening.
Of course we don't know the exact reason there was a busy signal when Rb and Egen tried to call in, just another possibility.

But it lends credence to Mr B having a calling card and not needing anyone to be at home to answer the phone to accept the charges.

They work together.


You have some great thinking Woodland, but I just don't see Eb dying at home especially before her car was seen at the little lot before 7pm. Jmo

 

[Woodland]

Agreeing isn't required - you dig where you want, others will dig where they want. All good.

 

[eyesonly]

Absolutely true woodland.
Please don't stop on your line of thinking, will try and give you whatever info I can to see your theory through.

There is one thing I do know and that is that i do not know where EB is and i do not know exactly what happened to her that night. Guess that 2 things lol.

 

[JohnPaul]

CB claimed to someone a phone did not hang up properly - frequently - that caused the line to be unusable. And the household put up with this? Mr B said the busy signals were caused by some sort of interference.

for what its worth,

i had been calling the B household pretty much everyday to speak with my friend PB for at least one year previous to the disappearance, maybe even more then a year, we spoke pretty much everyday,

never once can i recall the line giving me a "busy tone", they had call waiting, the phone would always "ring", even if somebody never answered,

i recall many times where MR.B was on the phone, i would be calling to speak to PB, MR.B would answer the call waiting and say to me "sorry, (my name) not now" and then hang up on me,

but a busy signal on the line.............never

 

[eyesonly]

for what its worth,

i had been calling the B household pretty much everyday to speak with my friend PB for at least one year previous to the disappearance, maybe even more then a year, we spoke pretty much everyday,

never once can i recall the line giving me a "busy tone", they had call waiting, the phone would always "ring", even if somebody never answered,

i recall many times where MR.B was on the phone, i would be calling to speak to PB, MR.B would answer the call waiting and say to me "sorry, (my name) not now" and then hang up on me,

but a busy signal on the line.............never

Do you have any ideas on how two people who had never met before both claim to have gotten a busy signal on that particular line on the same night of the 19th. Both Rb and Egen.

Very interesting info johnpaul, thank you, please keep it coming

 

[Woodland]

Speaking for myself only, think I know how that could happen back in 1990 - if you unplugged your phone it would still ring for the caller but not in the household or wherever the phone was. Still the case.

If you left your phone off the hook - a caller would get a busy signal and call waiting would not work since the line was not engaged - which call waiting needs. Possibly still true.

The main house line for the B residence could have been intentionally left off the hook to block all calls and attempted calls and MB's phone was used for the contact they needed/wanted using a calling card to charge to a phone outside the residence.

RB got through to MB's line around 11:00 pm and left a message - a constant open line would unlikely have been kept between Toronto and Florida for 12+ hours.

All jmo.

 

[JohnPaul]

Do you have any ideas on how two people who had never met before both claim to have gotten a busy signal on that particular line on the same night of the 19th. Both Rb and Egen.

Very interesting info johnpaul, thank you, please keep it coming

for a phone that has call waiting there are only two possibilities as to why it would give a "busy" signal,

the first is the phone was left "off the hook" so to speak,

the second is, the person on the line was talking to TWO different people at the same time, and "flipping" back and forth between them,

 

[Chorley8]

Motive? I mean for the idea suddenly dead in her home,