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

[greenthumb]

Also, the other thing that I'm going to comment and thn jump directly behind the couch and start waving a huge flag....I'm not convinced the PK posting here is really THE PK and not some one posting enough info fishing for more info or ideas blah blah, it wouldn't be the first time. Just my own weenie thought...

And also NSU's post below, sorry don't know how to do that fancy multi quote stuff

I am no kind of sleuther at all, I take everyone at their word, a bad and very old habit of mine... so I think this is brilliant thinking on both your parts!

WS does verify insiders, so was PK 'verified'? How does one know?

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

My thoughts about the 'Amazing Grace' vid - for some reason (which I cannot explain) I still feel that it was sent by the killer himself. Why to only PK and the lady across the street? I have no clue! Did Audrey catch him in the act of using her computer? Was the killer using the vid as a sick way of "Audrey" saying good-bye?

My biggest question about the vid is WHY to the lady across the street. Audrey was in the habit of e-mailing PK often. But it seems that she only e-mailed the other person once or twice a year. To me......that's pretty odd!

:twocents:

 

[greenthumb]

My thoughts about the 'Amazing Grace' vid - for some reason (which I cannot explain) I still feel that it was sent by the killer himself. Why to only PK and the lady across the street? I have no clue! Did Audrey catch him in the act of using her computer? Was the killer using the vid as a sick way of "Audrey" saying good-bye?

My biggest question about the vid is WHY to the lady across the street. Audrey was in the habit of e-mailing PK often. But it seems that she only e-mailed the other person once or twice a year. To me......that's pretty odd!

:twocents:

That could be so, though it would suggest a very twisted mind, wouldn't it!!! and I hope for AG's sake that the ugliness of her demise did not extend to such psychological tortures as that might suggest.

I am going with what seems to me a more likely scenario - that AG sent the video herself before there was any hint of trouble, and that the significance lies only in narrowing down the time frame of when were things still going along normally for AG.

As to why AG may send it to her neighbour, I suppose it could harken back to some conversation about favourite hymns, favourite musicians, etc.

Why the killer would send it to her - well, as I think you've suggested before, it may be the similarity/proximity of the two 'L' names on a contacts list.

:moo: :twocents:

 

[greenthumb]

I have no idea why the following has stuck out to me. From the Facebook group I read two postings from members of the group who appear to be Costco employees. I've been a very long time memberof costco and I have a gf who works there but other than her I'm pretty sure not one person there would remember who I was. Does any body else find that odd?.....OR... did she get her vehicle serviced there on a regular basis |???

The only thing that I think might explain Costco employees remembering AG would be the inclination for those who live alone and may be lonely, to be more likely to strike up a conversation with those they come across regularly in a public setting. If AG did not have other outlets for conversation on a regular basis, do you suppose she may have enjoyed a bit of a chat as she checked out at Costco? I believe that PK suggested that she loved Costco... so maybe as a regular, who was quite friendly with the staff, she became 'known' there?

 

[greenthumb]

Sorry, I am now going to try to answer my own question re: verified insiders... from Rules, Etiquette...

However, we like to make sure that anyone posting as a professional in a specific area (doctor, lawyer, search and rescue, etc.), or as someone with inside information, truly is what/who they claim to be. Verification is 100% optional. No posters are required to become verified unless they wish to post inside or professional information.

BBM

So, this would seem to say that PK should have been verified as an insider before posting 'inside' information. I still don't know how we would know if he had been... anyone?

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Sorry, I am now going to try to answer my own question re: verified insiders... from Rules, Etiquette...



BBM

So, this would seem to say that PK should have been verified as an insider before posting 'inside' information. I still don't know how we would know if he had been... anyone?

How could PK be 'verified' as really him?

- someone else using his computer?

- posting from a public computer (ie. McMaster)?

- LE telling WS that they are LE but will be posting as PK?

:dunno:

 

[greenthumb]

How could PK be 'verified' as really him?

- someone else using his computer?

- posting from a public computer (ie. McMaster)?

- LE telling WS that they are LE but will be posting as PK?

:dunno:

I dunno, either!

But I assume that WS mods must have a protocol they follow for verifications, since they offer to verify insiders? What that protocol would require, in terms of personal information, etc, I am not sure... and do you suppose that WS would knowingly permit LE to post here as an imposter? :what: I would not be cool with that! (not because I have anything against LE, but I wouldn't support the admin here misleading the members).

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

I really have no idea! I *think* WS needs proof if a person says "I'm a psychiatrist working with X accused criminal" type of thing.

But I have no clue how WS handles LE if they want to participate.

:dunno:

 

[greenthumb]

I really have no idea! I *think* WS needs proof if a person says "I'm a psychiatrist working with X accused criminal" type of thing.

But I have no clue how WS handles LE if they want to participate.

:dunno:

I have asked Salem, who graciously agreed to check into it further, but needs some time... we keep our mods busy!

 

[Sillybilly]

That could be so, though it would suggest a very twisted mind, wouldn't it!!! and I hope for AG's sake that the ugliness of her demise did not extend to such psychological tortures as that might suggest.

I am going with what seems to me a more likely scenario - that AG sent the video herself before there was any hint of trouble, and that the significance lies only in narrowing down the time frame of when were things still going along normally for AG.

As to why AG may send it to her neighbour, I suppose it could harken back to some conversation about favourite hymns, favourite musicians, etc.

Why the killer would send it to her - well, as I think you've suggested before, it may be the similarity/proximity of the two 'L' names on a contacts list.

:moo: :twocents:

Whoever Audrey's killer is greenthumb ... they went in there with a twisted mind to do what they did. Remember Russ Williams? After having been in the bedroom of one of his 12 year old victims, he left a message on her computer "Merci" .. and another of his victims that is lucky to be alive, he left a sick and threatening message on her computer. The Williams trial in October 2010 could be what sparked an aha !! copycat component in the mind of Audrey's killer.

Also, there is that huge discrepancy between the early morning "hell or high water" email and the other email on the same day that cancelled that same coffee klatch. It certainly seems that "HELL" came first. Why would Audrey herself send two such contradictory messages on the same day when the first one basically said she was on the mend and WAS going? Doesn't compute.

As to if and why the killer would send the music video to those two people to begin with? It was me who suggested the similarity wrt Linda v Lynne, which could explain the physical of WHO received it, but it doesn't explain the psychology of WHY it would be sent to anyone in the first place. Perhaps the killer knows why, or maybe even they don't ... possibly just for kicks or a form of maniacal remorse (i.e. "a wretch like me").

JMO

 

[shadowraiths]

Also, the other thing that I'm going to comment and thn jump directly behind the couch and start waving a huge flag....I'm not convinced the PK posting here is really THE PK and not some one posting enough info fishing for more info or ideas blah blah, it wouldn't be the first time. Just my own weenie thought...

No reason to wave a flag. lol

Fyi, afaics, the PK posting here, is the real PK, as I corresponded with him, and he emailed me a copy of his papers.

 

[greenthumb]

Whoever Audrey's killer is greenthumb ... they went in there with a twisted mind to do what they did. Remember Russ Williams? After having been in the bedroom of one of his 12 year old victims, he left a message on her computer "Merci" .. and another of his victims that is lucky to be alive, he left a sick and threatening message on her computer. The Williams trial in October 2010 could be what sparked an aha !! copycat component in the mind of Audrey's killer.

Also, there is that huge discrepancy between the early morning "hell or high water" email and the other email on the same day that cancelled that same coffee klatch. It certainly seems that "HELL" came first. Why would Audrey herself send two such contradictory messages on the same day when the first one basically said she was on the mend and WAS going? Doesn't compute.

As to if and why the killer would send the music video to those two people to begin with? It was me who suggested the similarity wrt Linda v Lynne, which could explain the physical of WHO received it, but it doesn't explain the psychology of WHY it would be sent to anyone in the first place. Perhaps the killer knows why, or maybe even they don't ... possibly just for kicks or a form of maniacal remorse (i.e. "a wretch like me").

JMO

Another Russell Williams-type psycho is precisely what I HOPE AG did not encounter, SB... yes, what she went thru was hell either way... but it is simply my fervent wish that there was not a 'cat and mouse, playing' quality to her last days/hours. So yes, I agree it takes a twisted mind to do what we know for a fact was done to AG... but twisted to another whole and more sinister level, IMO, if it was a 'game' someone was playing... a game that went beyond what happened between AG & her killer in her garage, and that the killer actually tried to reach out/involve her friends and acquaintances.

Sorry for not giving recognition where due for the possibility of mistaking one 'L' name for the other in a contacts list.

AG's about-face regarding her attendance at the coffee klatch does not bother me quite so much as it seems to bother others, although I also am not totally convinced that she really was ill. However, if I accept as fact that she was ill, then I think that human nature could explain the discrepancy.

Often when you are sick, early in the day, you feel a bit better and so, when AG wrote that early morning email to PK, she may have been very hopeful that she would be well enough to get out of the house for a bit, hence the 'hell or high water' statement. But then as the day wore on and her energy level flagged a bit, I think the symptoms may have seemed a bit worse again, as oftens happens when one is under the weather. I think that at some point later in the day, the reality dawned on her that, despite really wanting to feel better so she could get out for a bit, she really was just not up to going... and at that point, she sent the email to her coffee klatch friend to cancel.

Exact times of the emails would cast more light on that, of course... if the two emails were sent within minutes of one another, then yes... I would agree there was something else going on.

I know that is a very 'simple' take on things, offering very little intrigue... but often in life, the simplest answers are true, IMO. Occam's Razor, and all that jazz

Just my :twocents:

 

[greenthumb]

No reason to wave a flag. lol

Fyi, afaics, the PK posting here, is the real PK, as I corresponded with him, and he emailed me a copy of his papers.

Thanks for that! And what 'papers'?

Do you keep in communication with him? I think it must be terribly hard for him to come on this thread, but do hope that he is moving on with his life and has found a way to cope with all that his discovery of AG's body has brought into his life.

 

[shadowraiths]

Thanks for that! And what 'papers'?

The two papers were, "Design of a Rapid Prototyping Platform for Applications in Physiological Signal Processing" and "NoC-based FPGA Acceleration for Monte Carlo Simulations with Applications to SPECT Imaging."

The latter is scheduled to be published in IEEE Transactions on Computers, in March of this year ( link ). It is also the one referred to by the reporter ( link ), though, according to PK, he got it wrong. The former was a capstone paper for his masters. The revised capstone paper is now available on the web ( link ). The one I received was dated May 2011.

Do you keep in communication with him?

No, just had a few email correspondences back in September 2011, and haven't heard from him since.

 

[Sillybilly]

...No, just had a few email correspondences back in September 2011, and haven't heard from him since.

<rsbm>

Did you specifically ask for the papers, or were they sent to you as some form of explanation/clarification of sorts?

Thanks

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

<rsbm>

Did you specifically ask for the papers, or were they sent to you as some form of explanation/clarification of sorts?

Thanks

To SW:

This is also my question. If you have a moment, kindly clarify for us.

Many thanks,
Stone

 

[shadowraiths]

<rsbm>

Did you specifically ask for the papers, or were they sent to you as some form of explanation/clarification of sorts?

Thanks

I specifically asked for the paper referred to in the article. I have an extensive engineering background, and as such, was curious to read his research. That's when he clarified that Jon Wells, author of TheSpec article, had cited the wrong paper, and sent me both papers.

 

[greenthumb]

I specifically asked for the paper referred to in the article. I have an extensive engineering background, and as such, was curious to read his research. That's when he clarified that Jon Wells, author of TheSpec article, had cited the wrong paper, and sent me both papers.

That seems fairly much verificiation that he is who he purports to be... and thank you shadow for clearing that up for us!

 

[shadowraiths]

While I haven't stayed on top of this case, I still think the person who murdered Audrey was someone close to her. Someone she was in a relationship with. Since she was found in her garage, I think she had an argument of some sort with her killer, and the attack was a blitz-like attack. In other words, I don't think the killer is/was a sexual sadist, or even a serial killer, for that matter.

That said, I back burnered the following back when I was following this thread, and apparently, never got around to posting it. So, without further adieu...

The overkill and sexual component indicate her murder was up close and personal. PK indicates that she was fully clothed, though her jogging pants were torn ( link ), while the detective described the crime scene as the "worst he had ever seen" with a "sexual component." ( link ) The spec article notes she was both severely beaten and stabbed multiple times. ( link ) Am guessing she was beaten and then stabbed. This degree of violence arguably indicates rage. Hence the reason the profiler proffers the killer is both young and someone close to her. Within this context, he could be a secret paramour, or even a long lost child. The latter is less likely bc her will was never changed to reflect a child. As for the former? Audrey compartmentalized her relationships. Therefore a secret paramour would not necessarily be out of character for her.

In the case of a secret paramour, I'm leaning towards someone she may have met online... or at the very least, conducted most of her relationship with them in an online venue. Either via email, live chat or both. In this scenario, he would be much younger than Audrey. late teens to early twenties. He would also have above average intelligence, prollly geeky, and possibly struggling with some degree of say... aspergers, or something that made it tough for him to relate socially. Bc of this, Audrey might have taken him under her wing... say, as a protegee. But she would be bossy, too. Left over teacher stuff, perhaps. At some point, he may have wanted more from their relationship... more than she was willing to give. This could result in a volatile mix. While it was not random, it could have been the result of a disagreement wherein, in the end, his pent up resentment got the best of him. PK notes she was fully clothed and that her sweatpants were ripped. ( link) LE also mentions she had been beaten ( link) This, imo, reduces the likelihood they were actually "lovers" in the true sense of the word while increasing the possibility that they held differing povs wrt their relationship.​

 

[greenthumb]

While I haven't stayed on top of this case, I still think the person who murdered Audrey was someone close to her. Someone she was in a relationship with. Since she was found in her garage, I think she had an argument of some sort with her killer, and the attack was a blitz-like attack. In other words, I don't think the killer is/was a sexual sadist, or even a serial killer, for that matter.

That said, I back burnered the following back when I was following this thread, and apparently, never got around to posting it. So, without further adieu...

The overkill and sexual component indicate her murder was up close and personal. PK indicates that she was fully clothed, though her jogging pants were torn ( link ), while the detective described the crime scene as the "worst he had ever seen" with a "sexual component." ( link ) The spec article notes she was both severely beaten and stabbed multiple times. ( link ) Am guessing she was beaten and then stabbed. This degree of violence arguably indicates rage. Hence the reason the profiler proffers the killer is both young and someone close to her. Within this context, he could be a secret paramour, or even a long lost child. The latter is less likely bc her will was never changed to reflect a child. As for the former? Audrey compartmentalized her relationships. Therefore a secret paramour would not necessarily be out of character for her.

In the case of a secret paramour, I'm leaning towards someone she may have met online... or at the very least, conducted most of her relationship with them in an online venue. Either via email, live chat or both. In this scenario, he would be much younger than Audrey. late teens to early twenties. He would also have above average intelligence, prollly geeky, and possibly struggling with some degree of say... aspergers, or something that made it tough for him to relate socially. Bc of this, Audrey might have taken him under her wing... say, as a protegee. But she would be bossy, too. Left over teacher stuff, perhaps. At some point, he may have wanted more from their relationship... more than she was willing to give. This could result in a volatile mix. While it was not random, it could have been the result of a disagreement wherein, in the end, his pent up resentment got the best of him. PK notes she was fully clothed and that her sweatpants were ripped. ( link) LE also mentions she had been beaten ( link) This, imo, reduces the likelihood they were actually "lovers" in the true sense of the word while increasing the possibility that they held differing povs wrt their relationship.​

Thanks for sharing that, shadowraiths.

I agree, in general, with your theories and most definitely that this was not the work of a serial killer, IMO.

If by some chance it was a child of AG's (who most likely would not be all that 'young' any more, but could be what? in his twenties possibly, more likely older than 30), then I believe the rage came from AG's denial of that child, her refusal to change her will, etc to acknowledge him.

But I lean more toward the secret/online relationship gone wrong. I'm not convinced that they had ever actually met up until the time of the murder... but I think it is quite possible that AG was carrying on a very intense cyber relationship of some kind, maybe enjoying what she intended to be anonymous flirtation/stimulating conversation... and that somehow her online love interest sleuthed her out and insisted on a face to face meeting.

I recall reading former students' comments re: her authoritative manner with those younger than herself, and can imagine that she would attempt to deal quite sternly with such demands from someone younger than herself and try to control the situation, which may have incited his violent rage.

This scenario competes with the 'unknown person from her past' theory in my contemplations.

Both of these theories would have AG expecting a somewhat unwelcome visitor, confining the dogs, meeting with someone outside her home (in the garage), making excuses/arrangments to ensure none of her friends would be around her place in a certain time period, possibly by faking or exaggerating an illness... although I think it is equally likely that AG actually was not feeling very well, and still permitted a very insistent visitor into the garage... perhaps to 'set him straight' on a few things.