CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #6

[Chorley8]

I'm sure you've all already seen these images many times. Re-posting them, to remind us that Audrey's garage was a two-door garage.

:waitasec: I wonder if her body could have been found on the right-hand side area, and if so, I am wondering if there was blood splatter on the inside of one or both garage doors.

Hazel excellent reminder that we do no know for sure there was no blood splatter on the car. LE could have insisted the photographer photograph the side where there was none. Because we cannot see any we have gotten carried away believing it was absent - as I say excellent we need to bring that back into play.

So she could have been coming home from somewhere in the car opened the door on the right been attacked either by waiting perp or even by someone she was driving with (?)

2-door garage? Significant.

 

[roseofsharon]

Thank you for the pic's Hazel. I'm glad we can look back at A's home, now that it is gone.

It was my understanding that the smoking bench was outside the garage, but I'm not seeing one, unless it is on the other side of the garage or perhaps LE had already taken it away for forensic testing.

Just an observation, LV hands in pockets during interview, however, in another photo, it appears she is wearing mitts, but my pictures are a bit blurry. However, that would be one's preogative to keep hands in pockets even while wearing mitts.

I know the ages of LV and AG make it unlikely AG is LV's mother, but in another picture posted in the newspaper side by side, they look like mother and daughter. They even seem to have the same body type. Maybe they are sisters!

Just imo

 

[roseofsharon]

It was my understanding the car was parked on the side of the garage that was closest to the home and that AG was was lying on the garage floor on the passenger side of the car.

I thought I read this somewhere, but the more I think about it, when PK opened the garage door, he immediately saw AG on the garage floor.

If the car was parked on the house side of the garage and her body on the driver's side, PK would not have seen her that quickly.

I suppose the car could have been parked on the right side of the garage, in order to give AG more room when getting out of her car and her body found on the driver's side.

LE has not given any detail, yet they want tips? What am I missing!!

However, PK did say A's garage was (paraphrasing) jam packed with equipment, etc.

imo

 

[roseofsharon]

Did AK know AG at all?

When PK was interviewed at the funeral home, AK did not say a word. Media did not ask her anything, but you would think she might have said AG was a sweet person, as PK did.

imo

 

[Canadian4]

Chorley8

I remember reading AGs favorite tv show was the Big Bang Theory and I'm pretty sure secondary infection is a term one or two characters have used.

 

[roseofsharon]

Use of secondary infection not sure what you all think - how commonly is it used by lay people compared to say nurses and doctors? Definition:

'secondary infection
infection by a pathogen following an infection by a pathogen of another kind'.

Huge concern in hospital environments these days of course.

1. The purpose of the email if NOT by Audrey could chiefly be to keep P.K. at bay i.e. secondary infection sick don't come over P.K. said she hated to spread germs - but she's taken care of L.V. is coming over, coffee group promise could be to relieve his mind i.e. she is getting back to normal soon OR since there is probably no contact between coffee klatch and P.K. so to fill up Wednesday for him as well again keep him at bay.

2. OR it could be P.K. covering for himself. But the language doesn't feel like P.K.

3. Or it could be Audrey herself keeping P.K. at bay, lying slightly since she has an important visitor (as has been broached here).

Another interesting point Chorley. I think this may be the only time I have ever heard someone use this term, other than medical professionals.

AG was a school teacher, however, in her email, A starts a sentence with "and" and says "I got" instead of I have, starts a sentence with "but" and uses the contraction "I've" instead of I have, which to me, sounds awkward. Also noted, only one space after a period.

This is not a criticism, however, it just seems odd to me, considering AG was a school teacher.

Oh, and it would seem by this email, LV arrived sometime before 11:00 a.m. or noon on the 27th.

imo

 

[Sillybilly]

Stone, I could only find a picture on images with A's garage door open.

Note the lights. They are on. I can't tell if these are those sensor lights.

If these are sensor lights, it reinforces my own belief that the killer arrived in the daylight.


http://www.thespec.com/photozone/307921--lynden-homicide-investigation

imo

I do believe they are sensor lights, but I'm not real clear on how them being on in the daytime reinforces your belief the killer arrived in daytime, so you could explain for me. Thanks !!

Visiting the link you gave made me realize something else. Those long, narrow windows to the left of the garage doors would permit Audrey to look outside to see who was in her driveway or at her garage. Highly unlikely she would look out and see a stranger, open the garage door, and NOT let her doggies loose for protection.

Also, if a stranger was arriving under false pretences (i.e. door-to-door sales, etc), surely they would use her conventional front door. If they didn't arrive/knock at the conventional entry, and it was just some random dude breaking in, hoping to score money or sex, surely they would have heard two german shepherds barking up a storm, and no way they would choose to enter that particular household.

If anyone had broken in to lie in wait while Audrey was out, those uber-sensitive doggy noses would have picked up the scent immediately ... in which case, i'm pretty sure Audrey would NOT have confined the dogs.

 

[Sillybilly]

Chorley8

I remember reading AGs favorite tv show was the Big Bang Theory and I'm pretty sure secondary infection is a term one or two characters have used.

IMO I found Audrey's interest in that particular show odd right from the time we first heard of it. The only time i've seen it is when my 20+ year old grandkids visit. While the younger crowd might find it funny, apart from the main character being a physics wiz, I find the show childlike and verging on idiotic. Audrey was an older person who was interested in major scientific issues, and I'm just not real convinced that she was so totally into the show.

At one point, i though possibly Audrey tuned into the show for PK's benefit when he visited, but then i remembered that he said Audrey never served him coffee or watched tv with him when he visited.

 

[Sillybilly]

Thank you for the pic's Hazel. I'm glad we can look back at A's home, now that it is gone.

It was my understanding that the smoking bench was outside the garage, but I'm not seeing one, unless it is on the other side of the garage or perhaps LE had already taken it away for forensic testing.

Just an observation, LV hands in pockets during interview, however, in another photo, it appears she is wearing mitts, but my pictures are a bit blurry. However, that would be one's preogative to keep hands in pockets even while wearing mitts.

I know the ages of LV and AG make it unlikely AG is LV's mother, but in another picture posted in the newspaper side by side, they look like mother and daughter. They even seem to have the same body type. Maybe they are sisters!

Just imo

PK said the bench sat "behind" the Camaro and that LE took the bench.

I've always wondered about it being "behind" ... if it was meaning near the trunk of the car, did Audrey have to move it every time she removed the car from the garage? I doubt it, but not sure how to interpret that.

** WRT look-alikes, i've always thought Audrey looks very much like PK's grandmother.

ETA: ** Not insinuating a family relationship at all.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Yes, PK did say that the bench was behind the Camaro. By that, I took it to mean in front of the front bumper. To PK, it would look like it's "behind" the car as in 'hidden' or 'behind the car' as he entered the garage.

Could AG be related to any of the people in the scenarios - anything is possible but I highly doubt it.

AK wasn't merely silent at the Memorial, she seemed to be almost smirking to me. Like the cat who swallowed the canary.

:twocents:

 

[roseofsharon]

I do believe they are sensor lights, but I'm not real clear on how them being on in the daytime reinforces your belief the killer arrived in daytime, so you could explain for me. Thanks !!

Visiting the link you gave made me realize something else. Those long, narrow windows to the left of the garage doors would permit Audrey to look outside to see who was in her driveway or at her garage. Highly unlikely she would look out and see a stranger, open the garage door, and NOT let her doggies loose for protection.

Also, if a stranger was arriving under false pretences (i.e. door-to-door sales, etc), surely they would use her conventional front door. If they didn't arrive/knock at the conventional entry, and it was just some random dude breaking in, hoping to score money or sex, surely they would have heard two german shepherds barking up a storm, and no way they would choose to enter that particular household.

If anyone had broken in to lie in wait while Audrey was out, those uber-sensitive doggy noses would have picked up the scent immediately ... in which case, i'm pretty sure Audrey would NOT have confined the dogs.

Silly, I am thinking the killer arrived in the daylight because if they arrived at night, it would trip the sensor lights and I don't think the killer would risk being caught under the lights.

I know the killer would have been visible in the daylight too, but at night, the lights coming on and off would draw more attention to the area, but just imo.

I know that animals also trip the light, so people get used to them coming on and off for this reason, but if the killer was standing under the light and by chance a neighbour came by and saw them, it would be too risky.

In the daylight, the killer could sneak around to doors and windows and imo, it would be much easier to hide without drawing attention to themselves by a light coming on and off and the killer's vantage point of what was going on around him/her would be more visible in the day. It would be so black at night on Indian Trail and anyone could happen by and catch the light.

All just imo. Sorry for run on!

 

[Sillybilly]

I had a "situation" at my house one time where the bulbs in the outside motion detector had been unscrewed. Let's hope LE checked that out at Audrey's.

 

[Sillybilly]

Yes, PK did say that the bench was behind the Camaro. By that, I took it to mean in front of the front bumper. To PK, it would look like it's "behind" the car as in 'hidden' or 'behind the car' as he entered the garage.

Could AG be related to any of the people in the scenarios - anything is possible but I highly doubt it.

AK wasn't merely silent at the Memorial, she seemed to be almost smirking to me. Like the cat who swallowed the canary.

:twocents:

I know what you mean ... i've considered "behind" to mean either behind the trunk or behind a person's line of sight when the door is opened, LOL. Given that he also said "where it always lived" combined with "AG would spend lots of time sitting on the bench having a smoke or watching the dogs run or just surveying the property", made me think it had to be closer to the door in order for those things to be within her line of sight.

Excedrin anyone? :floorlaugh:

 

[roseofsharon]

So PK has stated the smoking bench was behind the Camaro in the garage, however, according to LV, the bench was outside.

I always assumed the bench was outside, so that A would not expose any non-smokers to second hand smoke.

imo

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/309093--friends-remember-audrey-gleave

 

[LeftCoaster]

IMO I found Audrey's interest in that particular show odd right from the time we first heard of it. The only time i've seen it is when my 20+ year old grandkids visit. While the younger crowd might find it funny, apart from the main character being a physics wiz, I find the show childlike and verging on idiotic. Audrey was an older person who was interested in major scientific issues, and I'm just not real convinced that she was so totally into the show.

At one point, i though possibly Audrey tuned into the show for PK's benefit when he visited, but then i remembered that he said Audrey never served him coffee or watched tv with him when he visited.

It doesn't faze me at all that Audrey would like to watch that show. Having worked in several high-tech environments, and associated on a friendship level with a group of what could politely be called "absent-minded professors," I've noticed the show is a favourite among my colleagues (we're talking 30- to 50-somethings, here, incidentally). The humour (which seems juvenile to me personally, but each to their own) seems to be a self-deprecating nod to those who are so fantastically intelligent about scientific matters that they are borderline useless for 'real life' situations - y'know, quantum physics no problem, but can't toast bread.

Somewhere way back, maybe in the first or second thread, somebody posed the suggestion that Audrey may have been a high-functioning autistic person (not sure of the current politically correct term). It would be quite in keeping with some of her quirks, and her appeal to younger people as well.:twocents: So, while she and PK didn't actually watch the show together, I can well imagine them chatting about it for its "geek humour." And once again, I get the feeling that someone close to the situation - and resentful of PK possibly being a confidante of Audrey's - might have decided that PK could readily become a POI because of his own strange mannerisms. Whether this is a setup engineered through the LV connection or not, I am unsure. That big gap between a savage murder based in some kind of vengeful statement and one motivated by a financial premise bothers me a lot.:moo: If there was no need for brutal beatings, multiple weapons, and sexual 'components', or elaborate 'discovery' scenarios... If it could have been staged more as a suicide or closer to natural causes, you'd think a money-motivated killer would go that route.

Seems the BIL said (in Wells' account?) that Audrey had received at least one death threat during her teaching career. I know I'm going against the grain somewhat here, but my strongest sense is the killer was acquainted with Audrey through teaching or some other Hamilton connection.

:twocents:

P.S. Looks like SB found the Excedrin and is back in fine form! Cheers!:great:

 

[roseofsharon]

A's favourite store was Costco. I wonder what type of items A purchased from Costco, how often she went to Costco and if she ever purchased a large item and paid an independent delivery person.

With Costco selling food in bulk, I can't imagine A shopping there for groceries, so I'm wondering why it was her favourite store ever.

imo

 

[dotr]

So let's say Audrey is sitting/standing in her open garage while the dogs are outside "taking care of business" when a strange ( or not) person approaches the house.

Would the dogs attack right away and bite, or bark and circle the person or would they jump up and knock down a potential intruder?

Would Audrey be forced to throw on her coat (if it was not already on) and try to pull the dogs away and establish if the person on her property had legitimate business being there, especially if they did not look like someone who "would rape and murder her in her own home".

Was Audrey then obliged to put the dogs away and apologize or argue with someone at the front of an open garage ?

 

[LeftCoaster]

So let's say Audrey is sitting/standing in her open garage while the dogs are outside "taking care of business" when a strange ( or not) person approaches the house.

Would the dogs attack right away and bite, or bark and circle the person or would they jump up and knock down a potential intruder?

Would Audrey be forced to throw on her coat (if it was not already on) and try to pull the dogs away and establish if the person on her property had legitimate business being there, especially if they did not look like someone who "would rape and murder her in her own home".

Was Audrey then obliged to put the dogs away and apologize or argue with someone at the front of an open garage ?

Quite plausible, dotr. Especially if Audrey did, indeed, chat with people she found interesting (cf PK's telling us that she mentioned sitting on her bench and talking to people for hours on end, and the one neighbour's remark about not finding her as reclusive as others had described her). There's a fair amount of consensus, though, that the dogs were protective, "mean," and clearly intended to serve as much as guards as companions for Audrey, so there would be a real possibility that she'd have to exercise caution with people approaching the house when they were loose. Which makes it bitterly ironic that the dogs were unharmed and she was murdered.

Okay, now I am thinking again, about crated dogs and soup delivery. We know of at least one expected visitor preceding the "three days' silence," for whom Audrey would ensure the dogs wouldn't be a problem. While not casting aspersions on LV, I wonder if someone else either accompanied or tailed LV, and perhaps took advantage of Audrey's seeing LV out the door...? Was the soup on the kitchen counter, stove, or in the fridge? Oh, to know some of those very basic details!:banghead:

Hmmmm!

 

[Sillybilly]

So let's say Audrey is sitting/standing in her open garage while the dogs are outside "taking care of business" when a strange ( or not) person approaches the house.

Would the dogs attack right away and bite, or bark and circle the person or would they jump up and knock down a potential intruder?

Would Audrey be forced to throw on her coat (if it was not already on) and try to pull the dogs away and establish if the person on her property had legitimate business being there, especially if they did not look like someone who "would rape and murder her in her own home".

Was Audrey then obliged to put the dogs away and apologize or argue with someone at the front of an open garage ?

To my knowlege, Audrey did not have any "Beware of Dogs" or "Dogs on Property" signs posted. The age of her dogs tells me it is unlikely those dogs had ever bitten anyone, or the neighbours would have known and the dogs possibly ordered put down.

People who aren't necessarily fond of dogs, or those who are not familiar with shepherd behaviour, can consider them "mean" or "vicious" because their barks are loud, and they can appear very menacing. Audrey was aware that her dogs frightened people and I expect her dogs were not left outside unsupervised (certainly given absence of a fence to prevent other dogs, adults, possibly children from entering the property).

In my old neighbourhood, we had some new folks move in down the lane. They had an odd young lad who took to arriving and throwing rocks at my 2 year old shepherd. To avoid any nasties, I decided a fence was in order, and until the installer could arrive in a couple of days, I took her out on a leash or left her out briefly on a chain. The next day I heard a gawdawful ruckus and flew out the door to see rocks on the lawn, my dog had hit the end of the chain, it snapped, she basically had the kid's feet nailed to the pavement as she dove in circles around his feet, teeth gnashing, snarling. She NEVER touched the kid. I was pretty shaken at the "potential" for her to harm a kid, and I called the breeder (also a well-recognized trainer of RCMP dogs) to discuss. He summed it up by saying "She had the full potential rip the kid to pieces but she didn't. She kept him where she wanted him to be until you got there. She was doing a job and she did it well".

IMO, Audrey's dogs had the potential for harm (as do all dogs) but it appears they had never harmed anyone. IF Audrey had to put the dogs away because someone arrived, i think it is far more likely she did so to make an acquaintance comfortable.

As for Audrey having been found with her coat on, I strongly feel the coat was put on for some reason after she was stabbed. I just can't see someone being able to effectively stab someone to death through a winter coat. Possibly someone wrapped her in the coat to move her body to the garage, but i really can't quite wrap my head around that one.

I know that doesn't address all the questions in your post, but you made me think ... again

All MOO

 

[Chorley8]

Leftcoaster: "That big gap between a savage murder based in some kind of vengeful statement and one motivated by a financial premise bothers me a lot. If there was no need for brutal beatings, multiple weapons, and sexual 'components', or elaborate 'discovery' scenarios... If it could have been staged more as a suicide or closer to natural causes, you'd think a money-motivated killer would go that route".

Absolutely true e.g. there is the pond right in front of the house for example cf. accidental drowning. And SillyBilly's point about the coat is another huge conundrum. Your theory of a Hamilton and/or school days link is very plausible as good as anything else - I agree that violence does seem out of proportion to financial motive. NOW if you were trying to get info out of a man it is entirely plausible to say e.g. if you don't give me the password I will cut off your X" - it is a stretch but if the perp saw Audrey as "phallic" had issues with gender is it possible they were cutting off..... something that wasn't there? As I said on a pulled thread the focus on the mailbox "part" in that story at the funeral or memorial COULD hint at that again possibly a stretch.

SillyBilly could you (please) fit the dates on P.K.'s and brother's Facebook business onto to your timeline - can be in a separate post if you think it doesn't belong on your overall timeline. Does seem that the dates of those posts e.g. "nothing ventured nothing gained" fit plausible dates of the crime - and if a small plot could be communication among plotters?

Amazing Grace: are any hints or clues available in the person of Andre Rieu himself no not as the perp we have enough theories already LOL. Seems to draw an elderly crowd lots of women (see audience in attached video) lots of nice daughters with elderly moms. No doubt Rieu is a sexy babe to some older women sort of like Tom Jones when I was young. He is famous for bringing back the waltz for which read couples. He has been in Toronto. He is French background but Dutch nationality in and around Ancaster lots and lots of Dutch settlers after WWII but that is too vague a fact to have much meaning. I realize Waltzing Matilda has nothing to do with the waltz form. If not Audrey's link then again I think it points to an older person sending.

[video=youtube;CXasKlTsjf8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXasKlTsjf8[/video]

Theories: my number one theory involves the crime originating from further out in the Niagara region but I have no way to get it down here.