CANADA Canada - Lindsay Buziak, 24, Victoria, BC, 2 Feb 2008

[dotr]

Murdered realtor’s dad says alleged assault at open house shows perils of industry

Great advice!
"He has been a realtor for almost 40 years and said while the industry hasn’t changed, society has — and people and companies need to adjust.

He said realtors should never turn their back on a client and always let the potential buyers enter a room first. Realtors should also keep moving if they feel uncomfortable and make their way toward the front door of the property.

Additionally, he said if someone feels uneasy about meeting a new client they should be careful with their greeting and avoid offering their hand for a handshake. This way the client can’t use the opportunity to yank them away or attack."

 

[jbirner]

Great advice!
"He has been a realtor for almost 40 years and said while the industry hasn’t changed, society has — and people and companies need to adjust.

He said realtors should never turn their back on a client and always let the potential buyers enter a room first. Realtors should also keep moving if they feel uncomfortable and make their way toward the front door of the property.

Additionally, he said if someone feels uneasy about meeting a new client they should be careful with their greeting and avoid offering their hand for a handshake. This way the client can’t use the opportunity to yank them away or attack."

Good points. I would add that realtors should work in pairs whenever possible. Also, trust your gut instincts. If something doesn't seem right than it probably isn't. Reading through this case there were alot of red flags and of course hindsight is 20/20.

 

[JSolt1210]

I just finished watching this case on ID Go, and it's just so baffling because I feel like the three main scenarios all make sense. Here's how I envision them:

1. It was Jason and his mom.

They were using the real estate business as a front in order to sell drugs, as someone upthread speculated. Lindsay found out about it and didn't know how to tell her dad. She realized she needed to get out of this situation ASAP, which is why she started talking about leaving Jason and returning to her ex. Somehow, Jason and his mom found out Lindsay was leaving, and she was now a liability to their front. If she left Jason, she'd obviously also quit his family's business, so what would stop her from reporting them?

The mom called with a fake accent to lure Lindsay to the house where she was killed. When Lindsay asked, they said it was through a previous client that they would've known Lindsay had. By an unfortunate coincidence, that client was out of town and couldn't confirm. Jason arrived late and parked at a distance on purpose to give the hired killers time to finish the job, and he also took a friend to generate a tight alibi. The brutality of the killing speaks for the personal nature of its origin.

2. It was a drug cartel.

Lindsay had communicated over Facebook with someone involved in what someone upthread called the largest bust in recent B.C. history. It stands to reason that the cartel could have wanted to retaliate against everyone connected to the members who were busted. Digging through social media they discovered the communication between Lindsay and the busted individual, and mistakenly believed her to be a snitch. They probably found her contact info through Facebook, either because she listed her number in her details, or she posted a photo that showed a real estate ad featuring her as a seller.

They called Lindsay to lure her to the house, using burner phones like they're known for, and either faking a Spanish accent or because the callers really were of Hispanic/Latino descent. When Lindsay asked, they just lied on the spot, saying it was through a previous client. By an unfortunate coincidence, that client was out of town and couldn't confirm. They hired a couple that resembled Lindsay to put her more at ease. The brutality of the killing speaks, not to being personal, but as a warning to anyone else who may want to speak out.

3. It was a thrill kill by a psychopathic couple.

It's rare but known to happen. We've all seen real estate ads picturing young and attractive agents. It's a business just like any other, marketing not just the property but also the agent facilitating the transaction. A couple happened to see her picture in an ad and fantasized about raping, torturing, and killing her in a newly-built (virgin?) luxurious multi-million dollar home.

They got her cellphone number by stalking her, and when Lindsay asked, they just made up a lie on the spot, saying it was through a previous client. By an unfortunate coincidence, that client was out of town and couldn't confirm. When things get a little uncomfortable inside the house, Lindsay makes an offhand remark that her boyfriend is outside, to kind of let them know she's not alone. The brutality of the killing here, then, speaks not to being personal or a warning, but to frustration at being unable to live out their fantasy as originally intended.

All of these scenarios make sense to me and sound logical. What do you think?

 

[jbirner]

Number 1 makes the most sense to me. It has to be someone from her inner circle who would know information such as her cell phone and previous clients. I'm thinking definitely someone from inside the office she was working in. She told her father she saw something she shouldn't have seen and that might have been her undoing.

While I wouldn't say scenario # 2 is out of the question, I just feel it is highly unlikely.

 

[JSolt1210]

Number 1 makes the most sense to me. It has to be someone from her inner circle who would know information such as her cell phone and previous clients. I'm thinking definitely someone from inside the office she was working in. She told her father she saw something she shouldn't have seen and that might have been her undoing.

While I wouldn't say scenario # 2 is out of the question, I just feel it is highly unlikely.

Agreed. If I had to rank them, I'd say #1 is most likely and #2 the least likely. I included #2 because to me, the overkill need not indicate a personal attack against her, but retaliation from an offended party (like a drug cartel) warning others, "this is what'll happen to you too, if you behave like Lindsay."

Another possible twist on scenario #1 that occurs to me: Could it have been another agent working in the same real estate company? Maybe someone that saw Lindsay's innate talent and charisma and felt jealous she would take away sales and clients—especially now that she might be leaving? I agree this could be farfetched, but at the same time others have said real estate is a highly competitive industry, and that she was excelling in it at a relatively young age.

 

[jbirner]

At this point I don't think anything is out of the realm of possibility. I do believe whoever is behind this has a lot of money at their disposal. It seems like hiring a couple to carry out this crime would cost a small fortune. If it was another agent, this would be a high price to pay to take out a competitor. I would like to know if any large withdrawals/deposits were made in the days before and after this murder.

 

[JSolt1210]

While researching, I came across this article written by "retired Royal Canadian Mounted Police homicide detective and forensic coroner" Garry Rodgers. His theory is that:

"Lindsay Buziak's murder was a deadly conspiracy involving mid-to-lower level drug trafficking players in Victoria, BC, and Calgary, Alberta, getting way over their heads with debt to the Sinaloa Cartel's Western Canadian conduit. They were compromised and sacrificed Lindsay's life as a diversionary scapegoat to compensate a large monetary debt and save the real informant(s) causing the multi-million dollar loss."

I'm not sure I understand what this means. Some drug traffickers owed money to the larger cartel network, so to get out of this debt, they ordered a hit on Lindsay as a diversion. Okay, sorta makes sense. But how does this hit "compensate a large monetary debt?" If anything, aren't you going to lose more money by hiring killers, unless you yourself do the killing? And then why do it to "save the real informant(s) causing the multi-million dollar loss?" Wouldn't you want to take out the informant that caused that loss?

He also names one of Lindsay's coworkers, alleging she had ties to several people involved with the cartel, going so far as to name who he believes were the actual killers. Interesting information, but I haven't seen this confirmed elsewhere—though as a retired RCMP officer, Rodgers sounds like he has authority.

I don't really care much for his tone at times, calling some theories "stupid", "absurd", and even using profanity, but it's still an interesting read.

And it does have some merit because I think the answer to this case lies in the burner phone. (Looking for more info on it is how I found the article.) According to sources, the burner phone was purchased several months prior, in late 2007, and was used only on the day before, and the day of, the killing. It was used for no other purpose, which means that most likely it was bought for no other purpose.

To me, this takes attention away from Jason and his mom, and shifts back onto organized crime like a drug cartel. It doesn't make sense to me that either Jason, his mom or both would buy a burner phone months in advance, with the intent of using it to kill Lindsay. If she was that much of a threat to them that they needed to kill her, would they have sat on that threat for months when they saw her just about every day?

But this does sound like something organized crime would do. Since their daily business is criminal activity, they would plan ahead and buy devices for use in some unspecified crime or deal in the future. The wider the gap between purchase and use, the harder the buyers would be to trace. It just so happened that this phone was then used to facilitate Lindsay's murder, but it could've just as easily been used to arrange a drug sale.

 

[kemo]

I have posted my support for. Jsolt’s option #3. I see it as basically a default option based on the lack of any evidence or reasonable motive for #1 or #2 and the excess amount of stabbing done which suggests that stabbing was part of the motive.

The two big questions I have are still :
1) is it clearly established that the cell number phone Lindsay was contacted on never used in her Real Estate business activities?

2) was the former client that the mystery call provided as a reference ever actually identified?

I suppose there are ways to find out someone’s cell number but it seems to me that anyone wanting to set Lindsay up the way she was ( for whatever reason) would use her regular business phone. Otherwise I would think it would set off all kinds of alarms. You would expect her to be wary of anyone calling a number she did not use for business.

If the referring client was identified, I would think he or she would be a critical source of evidence. Who would know that they had done business with Lindsay in the past and they would be unavailable at the time of the call? (Was any attempt made to see if someone had been calling other former clients; she didn’t have that many, to see if someone had been contacting them for suspicious reasons?)

Anyone have any information on the above questions.

 

[jbirner]

It is my understanding that her cell phone number was not published on any of her literature, be it brochures or business cards. They only listed her business phone. When she asked the caller how she got her cell phone the caller stated from a previous client.

I have yet to find any mention of the identity of the previous clients, only that they were out of town. The question is, how many people actually knew her cell phone number? That list most likely contains the name of the person that set this up.

 

[almagata]

There is something strange in the speed that Jason called 911 and entered the house. The fact that he took a friend with him to prove that he was not the killer and had the friend enter the house before he did is also odd.

My mom was a real estate agent and I have met her at houses that she was showing to a customer in the past. It would have never occurred to me to call 911 after 10 minutes delay. I would have sat outside for at least an hour before I would have ever had tried to go into the house. I would have assumed she was answering questions for her clients or that they were discussing the details of an offer.

If my mom had not responded to her cell phone and no one came to the door, I more than likely would have texted her that I was going home or to a coffee shop to wait and tell her to call/text me when she was available and left. I would not have been worried for hours. I would have figured she was working with the client on the offer.

 

[jbirner]

Playing devil's advocate, given the circumstances that they were both suspicious and knew something wasn't adding up, he should have walked in that door the second he arrived there. I know hindsight is 20/20 but would things have gone different if he had been there on time. Maybe she should have told them her partner was on his way and should be there very soon. Again, easy to look back and say shoulda, coulda. There were many red flags in this case and when something doesn't feel right always trust your gut.

 

[Jbetty567]

Ok guys. Researching this case for an upcoming piece. One “fact” that is stated repeatedly is that JZ has consistently refused to give a DNA sample. This statement is contained in the Wikipedia page on L’s murder - source is listed as the Casefile podcast. I looked at the Casefile list of sources and have checked them all - and I cannot find any original, credible, factual source for the assertion that JZ refused to give a sample. The SPD said he cooperated fully. Anyone have a source for this alleged fact???

Also, since no DNA other than L’s was found, why would his DNA matter anyway?

 

[kmclaren]

Ok guys. Researching this case for an upcoming piece. One “fact” that is stated repeatedly is that JZ has consistently refused to give a DNA sample. This statement is contained in the Wikipedia page on L’s murder - source is listed as the Casefile podcast. I looked at the Casefile list of sources and have checked them all - and I cannot find any original, credible, factual source for the assertion that JZ refused to give a sample. The SPD said he cooperated fully. Anyone have a source for this alleged fact???

Also, since no DNA other than L’s was found, why would his DNA matter anyway?

You will find very little MSM with actual facts, most of the information out there did not come from the Saanich Police or other official sources. The official statement is this: "The Zailo family … have met with our detectives … of their own free will, voluntarily, and have satisfied every investigative request that our detectives have had of them," Jantzen said.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...end-linked-to-slaying-of-b-c-realtor-1.957459

Also, what is your source that no DNA other than Lindsay's was found? I doubt that is actual fact either...

 

[JSolt1210]

You will find very little MSM with actual facts, most of the information out there did not come from the Saanich Police or other official sources. The official statement is this: "The Zailo family … have met with our detectives … of their own free will, voluntarily, and have satisfied every investigative request that our detectives have had of them," Jantzen said.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...end-linked-to-slaying-of-b-c-realtor-1.957459

That's one reason why I lean away from Jason and his mom, and more towards the "drug cartel," "psycho couple," or even "jealous co-worker" theories.

Jason and his mom's reported behavior is suspicious to me, but ultimately LE is "satisfied" with their cooperation. Jantzen himself put it more bluntly at a press conference: "We would like to state unequivocally that no member of the Zailo family is considered a person of interest or a suspect in this investigation."

Of course everyone makes mistakes, but LE surely knows more than we do, so if they don't look at the Zailos as persons of interest or suspects, I don't feel like I can.

 

[Jbetty567]

You will find very little MSM with actual facts, most of the information out there did not come from the Saanich Police or other official sources. The official statement is this: "The Zailo family … have met with our detectives … of their own free will, voluntarily, and have satisfied every investigative request that our detectives have had of them," Jantzen said.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...end-linked-to-slaying-of-b-c-realtor-1.957459

Also, what is your source that no DNA other than Lindsay's was found? I doubt that is actual fact either...

PressReader.com - Your favorite newspapers and magazines.

This article quotes Horsley stating this. Also debunking the myth that Jason was there per her request to protect her.

There is so much misinformation in this case!!

 

[JSolt1210]

PressReader.com - Your favorite newspapers and magazines.

This article quotes Horsley stating this. Also debunking the myth that Jason was there per her request to protect her.

There is so much misinformation in this case!!

Wow! Thank you so much for sharing that article. When I compare its details to those presented on the Lindsay Buziak Murder Timeline article "as per Dateline, Inspector Rob McColl and Detective-Sgt. Chris Horsley," so many discrepancies emerge.

1. According to the "Dateline" article, "5:38 pm to 5:41 pm police believe this is when Lindsay was murdered." The times come from the claim that Lindsay never opened Jason's 5:38pm text, and Lindsay's Blackberry made a phone call out at 5:41pm, which police believe was a pocket dial as a result of the attack.

But the PressReader (PR) article says that police "found that she responded to text messages during the showing until sometime between 5:42 and 5:44 p.m., indicating the attack occurred then."

PR doesn't say to whom Lindsay was responding. If it was Jason, I think they would've said so. Maybe she didn't open Jason's 5:38pm text because she was corresponding with someone else?

2. The common narrative is that Lindsay had asked Jason to stop by the house during the showing because she felt uncomfortable. Thus his late arrival suggests he needed time to allow for the killing.

But according to PR, Saanich police say Lindsay "felt the showing was unusual" but "wasn't apprehensive about it."

Jason stopped by, not because she asked him to, but because "he had real estate documents for Buziak to sign." So there was no "late" arrival because there was no rush. In fact, maybe he intentionally arrived later in order not to disrupt the showing.

3. Most glaring to me is the "quick" 911 call, because the claim is that Jason did this to establish an alibi.

But according to PR, Jason immediately knew something was wrong when he arrived at 5:45pm and saw the front door locked, because it should've been open during the viewing. And even then he didn't call police, but with "his friend made several attempts to enter the house, and cellphone records show he made calls to obtain access."

He didn't sit around "parked," like the "Dateline" article suggests, but he tried to get inside, called Lindsay, maybe split up with his friend to look around, etc., before discovering her body upstairs and calling police at 6:05pm. I can see all of this taking 20 minutes.

If the PressReader article is more accurate, then I can agree with LE that the Zailo family shouldn't be viewed as persons of interest or suspects.

 

[jbirner]

Assuming this article is accurate, it would explain why she went ahead and showed the house instead of waiting for JZ to get there first. If she was so afraid, she wouldn't have went into a dwelling alone with them.

 

[LadyL]

Great advice!
"He has been a realtor for almost 40 years and said while the industry hasn’t changed, society has — and people and companies need to adjust.

He said realtors should never turn their back on a client and always let the potential buyers enter a room first. Realtors should also keep moving if they feel uncomfortable and make their way toward the front door of the property.

Additionally, he said if someone feels uneasy about meeting a new client they should be careful with their greeting and avoid offering their hand for a handshake. This way the client can’t use the opportunity to yank them away or attack."

wow
has it really come to that?
(rhetorical)

 

[Jbetty567]

Wow! Thank you so much for sharing that article. When I compare its details to those presented on the Lindsay Buziak Murder Timeline article "as per Dateline, Inspector Rob McColl and Detective-Sgt. Chris Horsley," so many discrepancies emerge.

1. According to the "Dateline" article, "5:38 pm to 5:41 pm police believe this is when Lindsay was murdered." The times come from the claim that Lindsay never opened Jason's 5:38pm text, and Lindsay's Blackberry made a phone call out at 5:41pm, which police believe was a pocket dial as a result of the attack.

But the PressReader (PR) article says that police "found that she responded to text messages during the showing until sometime between 5:42 and 5:44 p.m., indicating the attack occurred then."

PR doesn't say to whom Lindsay was responding. If it was Jason, I think they would've said so. Maybe she didn't open Jason's 5:38pm text because she was corresponding with someone else?

2. The common narrative is that Lindsay had asked Jason to stop by the house during the showing because she felt uncomfortable. Thus his late arrival suggests he needed time to allow for the killing.

But according to PR, Saanich police say Lindsay "felt the showing was unusual" but "wasn't apprehensive about it."

Jason stopped by, not because she asked him to, but because "he had real estate documents for Buziak to sign." So there was no "late" arrival because there was no rush. In fact, maybe he intentionally arrived later in order not to disrupt the showing.

3. Most glaring to me is the "quick" 911 call, because the claim is that Jason did this to establish an alibi.

But according to PR, Jason immediately knew something was wrong when he arrived at 5:45pm and saw the front door locked, because it should've been open during the viewing. And even then he didn't call police, but with "his friend made several attempts to enter the house, and cellphone records show he made calls to obtain access."

He didn't sit around "parked," like the "Dateline" article suggests, but he tried to get inside, called Lindsay, maybe split up with his friend to look around, etc., before discovering her body upstairs and calling police at 6:05pm. I can see all of this taking 20 minutes.

If the PressReader article is more accurate, then I can agree with LE that the Zailo family shouldn't be viewed as persons of interest or suspects.

I think the PR article contains some very interesting info. I do think it may be wrong about the timing of L returning texts - every source I’ve seen from the SPD specifically references the pocket dial as the last communication from her.

I cannot recall a case where the MSM has got such completely different “facts” depending on which article you read as is the case here. It’s just crazy.

 

[chrisinmd]

Just heard about this case by watching the "Still a mystery" series on ID Discovery channel.

Very tragic and strange case.

Female real estate agents are potentially in danger when showing homes alone. At least I know now in my area they make you show up at the local real estate office and show ID before they will take you on a house tour.

But when a agent is attacked during a home showing it is normally 1 of 2 motives. Robbery or sexual assault. The attacker knows they have a attractive agent alone by themselves they can rape or rob if money is what they are after. Neither is the motive in this case since she was not raped and nothing of value was taken. Also it would be very, very rare for a woman accomplice and a guy to talk part in a sexual assault as a team. Karla Homolka case comes to mind but very rare situation.

So where does that leave us motive wise? Drugs I guess. But it does not seem she was involved with drugs and any connections she had I would not think would be enough to warrant a professional hit like this case seems to indicate. I know one of her friends was arrested for drug trafficking but that seems like a very loose connection to me. She was not listed as a witness and not scheduled to testify against anyone and I read where the police stated she was not a cooperating witness and was not providing them information on drug crimes. So the idea this is a drug hit to eliminate a potential witness dosent seem to hold up. Now maybe its possible someone in the drug world wrongly thought she was snitching and ordered a hit.

So I guess that leaves us with the boyfriend as a suspect. Police seem pretty confident they have eliminated him as a suspect. We know he didn't do it himself since he is on video and with a friend somewhere else. Could he have hired someone? Perhaps. But I don't see any evidence or motive for that either. Usually when someone in a relationship hires a hitman to kill the other person it is over a bitter divorce/ kids/ money/ domestic abuse. Don't really see that in this case either.

So where does that leave us? Well this is a pretty well planned murder and she was the one specifically targeted for some reason. The purchase of the burner phone in advance and the setting up of the home showing indicates that. The killers knew enough to only use the phone just to contact the real estate agent and got rid or never used the phone again immediately after the murder.

The method of murder is a bit confusing as well. Stabbing usually indicates a crime of passion. But it dosent appear like she knew her killers at all. Maybe the killers didn't want the noise associated with using a gun.

Bottom line is she was targeted well in advance for a semi professional hit at the very least and no clear motive that I can figure out.

Anyway interested in hearing anybody thoughts?