Canada - Lucas Fowler, Chynna Deese, and Leonard Dyck, all murdered, Alaska Hwy, BC, Jul 2019 #14

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I've being following this Ritalin thought.

Let's keep in mind that, as far as I know, our only source of the idea BS snorted Ritalin comes from just one person quoted in a newspaper article. And he admits he didn't even witness it first hand.

From the way the article is written, it sounds like the 'teenager' is just repeating something he's heard happened at the party. Otherwise he wouldn't have said "If it's true..."

Suddenly, behaviour that some who knew the teens had dismissed as simply odd or unsettling has taken on a grave new meaning. A teen in Port Alberni described hanging out with Mr. Schmegelsky and Mr. McLeod while they camped at Sproat Lake this spring, and said Mr. Schmegelsky was wearing a swastika armband and military fatigues, and using a replica Nazi knife to crush Ritalin tablets and snort them.


“I’m so dumbfounded that Kam would be a part of this,” said the teen, whom The Globe and Mail is not identifying by name because of his youth and his concern about being associated with Mr. Schmegelsky. (The Globe conducted the interview with the knowledge of the teen’s father.) “If it is true, I’d be surprised about Kam, but I would not be surprised about Bryer. Let’s just put it this way, he was a little bit [messed] up in the mind.”

I'm reserving judgement on how much weight I give to this 'snorting Ritalin' statement.

Just one person in Canada has mentioned someone had told them this story about Byron and Ritalin at a party and then it's mentioned in a national paper and taken as the truth and ran with...

It makes me wonder.

Edited to add source:

Searching for answers: Sense of unease lingers in B.C.’s isolated north as police hunt suspects in remote killings

Just my opinion, but I the way I read this when I first saw it is a little different; the "if this is true..." part wasn't about the Ritalin snorting incident (that seems to be given as a first hand account) but rather regarding the killings.

I'm not surprised that, even if many of their peers witnessed such behavior as this one claimed, they would be reluctant to come forward - especially if they too were engaged in such behavior or similar. On the other hand, having only one anonymous witness makes it very, very plausible to doubt the veracity.
 
How do you know the boy quoted didn't know Bryer well?

Different types of substances (legal and illegal) are used by people (adults and teens) on a somewhat regular basis.
DBM due to link issues
 
Last edited:
Quite so. Even if proven that the deaths occurred as a result of gunshots, it would be necessary to determine who held the gun that fired the bullets, and the rationale for that action: murder, self defense or accident.

Because both the murder suspects are dead, if the victims were shot, why would it be necessary to determine who held the gun or what was their motive for shooting three innocent victims? Three murders, three instances of self-defence or three accidents?

Nobody will be convicted postmortem. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, assuming there’s no other suspects, the murder file will be closed because the only known suspects are dead.
 
Last edited:
It is difficult to believe they both chose, at exactly the same moment to end their lives, and then managed to achieve that ambition. Yes, Thelma and Louise did, with the aid of a soft top Chevy, but Kam and Bry?..

Thelma and Louise also had the help of academy award winning screenwriter, Callie Khouri and a production budget of over 16 million US bux. Our own prime time "cross canada manhunt" pales by comparison. MOO
 
Yes, and I'm sure it'll be revealed that KM's mother was a real piece of work as well and responsible for her poor son's choices.
Well I know for fact it's not my fault - however people say video games weren't at fault, others say parents aren't at fault, friends aren't at fault, the town they grew up in isn't at fault, - yet 3 innocent people are dead,,,, oh yeah then there are those who don't believe the two murder suspects are at fault for those deaths. Seems like no one or nothing is at fault and no one wants to take responsibility.
 
There is really way too little info for us to speculating about how the offenders died, motivations, and the strength of the case against them.

I think developing theories is fun an all, especially in cases where we have a load of evidence to work with.

So many times on other cases we've gone down huge rabbit holes, only for police to reveal key info they have held all along.

All I will add is these guys clearly weren't forensically careful for all their burning of vehicles and my guess is they left significant forensic evidence at the first crime scene.
 
There is a lot for me as well that does not make the official narrative add up. I have said before, and I still maintain, there is something not right with the LD part of the story. <modsnip - discussing moderation>

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts...

Regarding the LD manner of death not being released as per the family's wishes, I have a question: Do the police actively ask the family members if they want the info disclosed, or is it that the family makes the request? If it's a case of the family asking, then we can probably speculate that the manner of death was more that a simple shooting...
 
I read a news article somewhere online today where a "friend of a group of Bryer's friends" (!!) said that they were all horrified about the things these people (eg: this boy and the girl interviewed early on) who didn't even know Bryer were saying, that he was not a horrible person, had a great group of friends and they did not think he would ever want to hurt somebody, I will search for the link before this is deleted (sorry no link just yet!).
Hmm, friends of friends? I look forward to your link of an actual MSM article quoting the friends of friends. My original link to that article was not to say Bryer was horrible (I don't know that, never met him) but to share that he obviously partied on occasion, quite possibly with Kam, as they were supposedly inseparable. And people saw him crushing Ritalin tabs (with a distinctive knife), and he, they, who knows, snorted Ritalin.
 
I know some people probably just want to write these guys off as monsters beyond redemption and not bother to get into their heads and figure out what was going on, but research indicates (see the article I posted above) that most young people who turn to violence could have been stopped with these interventions.

RSBM

I would add to this that first time offenders actions can appear to lack explanation, but are often in fact part of an escalation.

It may be so simple that on the road, away from their normal environment they may have felt less constrained and able to act out when an opportunity presented.

Lots of first time killings happen via a loss of control where there was no clear plan to murder

We shall see in the coming weeks and months after LE has a chance to piece everything together
 
Hmm, friends of friends? I look forward to your link of an actual MSM article quoting the friends of friends. My original link to that article was not to say Bryer was horrible (I don't know that, never met him) but to share that he obviously partied on occasion, quite possibly with Kam, as they were supposedly inseparable. And people saw him crushing Ritalin tabs (with a distinctive knife), and he, they, who knows, snorted Ritalin.
I have deleted until I can find the link for people to read!
 
Because both the murder suspects are dead, if the victims were shot, why would it be necessary to determine who held the gun or what was their motive for shooting three innocent victims? Three murders, three instances of self-defence or three accidents?

Nobody will be convicted postmortem. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, assuming there’s no other suspects, the murder file will be closed because the only known suspects are dead.

"assuming there's no other suspects" - LE has made it clear that the possibility of other suspect(s) has not yet been discounted. Until there is clarity on that point, there may yet be one or more highway murderers still on the loose. Moreover, without clarity on that point, the inevitable inquiries will soon be upon us regarding LE and military handling of the "manhunt". On a basic family relations level, if it turns out that there is insufficient evidence to have even supported charges, then it is simply cruel to require the falsely accused's family to bear the stigma and shame associated with their offspring's presumed crimes. Most importantly the families of the BC victims deserve to know, to the fullest extent humanly possible, the true circumstances surrounding the tragic untimely deaths of their loved ones.
 
Because both the murder suspects are dead, if the victims were shot, why would it be necessary to determine who held the gun or what was their motive for shooting three innocent victims? Three murders, three instances of self-defence or three accidents?

Nobody will be convicted postmortem. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, assuming there’s no other suspects, the murder file will be closed because the only known suspects are dead.
DBM
 
Sorry if this has been covered before, but is there any consensus on what type of evidence would be deemed sufficient in order for the Crown to lay charges? Obviously the evidence has to be such that they feel they could get a conviction, but are there any sort of guidelines to the type of evidence (e.g. eyewitness testimony) that would be required? What I'm asking is does driving a vehicle belonging to a murder victim (while your vehicle is found torched 2 km from the body) suffice in order to be charged with second degree murder?
 
What? Saying that a multitude of factors led up to them committing these murders and that those factors could have been changed, and that we can learn from this case to prevent the next one from happening, isn't the same thing as saying the victims don't deserve any sympathy and that Kam and Bryer are absolved of what they did. You're literally making up something that absolutely nobody here is saying. But what I can tell you is your attitude of "they didn't have any real issues because they were white males in a Western country," is going to accomplish absolutely ZERO when it comes to preventing other young people from turning to senseless violence. And that is backed up by multitudes of research on this topic.
School Shooters: What's Their Path To Violence?


am on Sydney time, hence delay in response.

this series of murders cannot in any way be sheeted home and lumped in with school shootings, except on the very shaky ground that the ages of the perpetrators is similar. And, I suppose, the fact that they both had left school, which is , I gather, a trait, somewhat of some school shooters.

These were young men who were on an adventure. They said so. They claimed they were off to Yukon for work, or Whitehorse.. It had nothing to do with their school, or the underlying 'causes' that 'multitudes ' of researchers say on this topic, and I might add, most of the research is done by Americans, about Americans, because that is where these school shootings, in the main , occur, despite one in Finland last year. If anything, once the political aspect is removed, it has more to mirror in the antics of Breivik in Norway than any school shooting in the USA. Random victims, but in Breiviks case, not a random location.

Therefore, it just isn't logical to transpose that research, into that subject, into these murders and these two murderers. They had no connection whatsoever to their eventual victims, nor to the location , which appears to be random to both killers and victims. Totally random. Nothing to read or extract from a school shooting, or a mall shooting , for that matter into this event.

In many ways, it is surprising that Kam and Bry chose to do their killing on the lonely highway, without an audience, without the expectation of a 'statement of intent' , without the hue and cry of far more potential victims.

And like Breivik, like the kid in Finland, like the bloke in Charlotte, like the mall shooter in Dayton, like ( and so on and so on ) all white males, all having been well fed and housed and clothed and compulsorily educated , in the Western philosophy and tradition
and in the main, educated quite professionally for at least 12 years of their lives, unlike, as I can say with utter accuracy, billions of young men around the world. Billions. They had , despite parents divorcing , which is certainly the norm , more than parents staying to gether, really, a protected life in comparison.

Since this kind of thing has been going on for a very long time , (remember the one girl who was a perpetrator decades ago, the girl from the song " I don't like Monday' by the Boomtown rats? So far, she is the only female school shooter ) , it doesn't seem that research has got very far, the same old 'causes' are trotted out. The mothers is the first howl, usually, then video games, then horror DVDs , then the School, wherever it may be , then the brutality of teenage friends who pick on this sad child, then the 'system' and somewhere some one says 'what about the fathers?" and that's quickly moved on from, then the Government, then the voters, then the doctors, and then it's back to the Mothers fault, again.
 
Interview with Vancouver criminal lawyer, Paul Doroshenko on what happens with the three murder investigations in northern B.C. now that the bodies of suspects BS and KM are believed to have been discovered.

Part 1

Q. What are the RCMP saying about the status of the investigation …

A. Well, yesterday they came out and said, “Look, we’re not just drawing the conclusion automatically that Fowler and Dease were killed by the two suspects. It’s possible that there’s another person out there who committed those murders”, but the police had already concluded that Mr Dyck was likely killed by McLeod and Schmegelsky but they don’t want to put the blinders on. What if it’s somebody else. …

And they also may want to get to the bottom of what the motive was. I mean it doesn’t look like it was likely that any of these people were killed for their money. I mean Fowler and Dease were driving an old Chevy van. They didn’t look like they were well-heeled or something like that. Were these two individuals killing people for the thrill of it? Was it a robbery that went wrong and then they ended up just going on the road? I mean there’s quite a bit to investigate here. How did they die? Was it a murder/suicide? Was it a situation where you’ve got a leader and a follower and eventually the relationship falls apart when they’re on the run?



Q. I want to ask you about the charges, and you sort of alluded to this. The police charged KM and BS in the death of Leonard Dyck but have only named them as suspects in the murders of CD and LF. Why do you think that is?

A. They probably haven’t got far enough along in their investigation, but let me just pose the problem that the police have in all of these circumstances where they start down the road with one person. So say they assume that Subject A is the person who committed the murder and they start going down that road and they start collecting evidence along that line and ultimately they conclude that they’re investigating the wrong person and they realise they should have been investigating Subject B all the way along. Well, when the time comes for the trial for Subject B, if that person is ever charged, they’ve got a wonderful defence in that they can point the finger at Subject A and say, ‘Look, the police were on the right track at the beginning’.

So the police are reluctant to start listing who the likely person they think committed the murder is until and unless they’ve basically eliminated or ensured that they are so positive of themselves when they’ve conducted that investigation because they don’t want to create a defence for somebody else. I mean if somebody else actually did kill Fowler and Dease, they’ve got a great defence right now because the police have already gone down the road with the assumption that these two deceased individuals found in Manitoba were the murderers or involved in the murder.



https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1584469571997
 
Interview with Vancouver criminal lawyer, Paul Doroshenko on what happens with the three murder investigations in northern B.C. now that the bodies of suspects BS and KM are believed to have been discovered.

Part 2

Q. So how long would these cases remain open then, I mean considering that these two bodies were found? They’re very likely these two teen suspects. So how long do police keep pursuing other leads before they close these cases or will they ever be closed?

A. Well, I mean it all depends on what evidence they find, right. If they find something that is associated to Fowler and Dease that have been carried with these two individuals to Manitoba, then I think the police can come to the conclusion that the likelihood is that they were the ones who committed all three murders. Again, Fowler and Dease were said to have been shot. We don’t know how Mr Dyck was murdered at this point. There hasn’t been a clear statement by the RCMP about how he died. They found his body burnt. But if it’s a bullet and they recover the slug, it’s usually fairly easy to tie a slug from one murder to a slug from another murder if it’s all been fired from the same gun. If they were travelling around and they had one or two weapons and used these weapons and the RCMP recover the weapons, well that’s very easy for them to look at striations on bullets and come to a conclusive conclusion that it was fired from the same weapon.



Q. What can the public expect to learn? Obviously you’re talking a lot about what police will find or could find in the coming days and weeks, but do you think on our end whether we’d be learning anything more about the case moving ahead aside from the autopsies and those findings?

A. Well, the RCMP run the risk of looking like they’re withholding information from the public that should be in the public domain, and if they’re not engaged and providing some information, they know that they can be criticised. And if it was 20 years ago, I’ll tell you, they wouldn’t have given us half the information that they have now. But the way that it ends up being discussed on the internet and the questions that are put to the RCMP these days, typically they feel much more compelled to provide information.

You may have noted yesterday in the press conferences they gave, they were thanking the media, and it was all a little bit strange for them to be doing that and almost like complimenting the media to get them to stop asking questions. But they recognise the obligation that they have and that they’re gonna be called out if they don’t at least come clean enough that people are satisfied with the explanations that are given. So I expect that there will be more press conferences in the future where they will lay out all of the conclusions that they came to generally speaking. Many people will still be unsatisfied I expect but they have to take it to the end, essentially for the victims’ families and also to ensure that they’ve conducted a proper investigation.”

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1584469571997
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
140
Guests online
2,125
Total visitors
2,265

Forum statistics

Threads
601,678
Messages
18,128,213
Members
231,121
Latest member
GibsonGirl
Back
Top