CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #8

[Woodland]

Seems they had to have had some DNA that did not belong to Audrey or why would they have requested DNA samples from her friends a year later?

I think Salem gave a good explanation for that type of question on page 28, post #680 -

LE has great leeway to say things in hopes of getting a reaction or finding another clue.


If evidence is lacking, LE needs to use some method to crack this case, imo.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

"The Brantford Expositor reported when he was sentenced on Feb. 3 for carrying a concealed weapon, Justice Ken Lenz said he didn’t believe Scott was violent, even though he could be intimidating because he yells and has a problem with authority figures."

Wow....now that is an eye opener.

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/03/charge-dropped-in-killing-of-exteacher

Yes, this man has his problems and he's "different". Having problems and being "different" does not make one a murderer. He was an easy fall guy for LE at the time. And, it's my OPINION that the killer knew LE would zero in on this man.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Quoted form GT:

DLS's lawyer is on record as saying that there was no DNA, for what it's worth.



I think we discussed this long ago. It's possible that the lawyer meant 'There's no DNA against my client'.

 

[greenthumb]

Quoted form GT:

DLS's lawyer is on record as saying that there was no DNA, for what it's worth.



I think we discussed this long ago. It's possible that the lawyer meant 'There's no DNA against my client'.

Yes, that is possible, as Woodland pointed out in her post above.

However, I am inclined to think if there was DNA but it didn't match his client's, the lawyer might say 'There is DNA, and that DNA excludes my client!'.

Instead, he said,

“We’re been poring through mountains of disclosure ... and the police have been flailing about trying to find some evidence to theoretically carry on with this,” he said. “The simple reality is they never had any evidence. They have no DNA, they have no-nothing.”

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/03/charge-dropped-in-killing-of-exteacher

BBM

I realize that I am reading into what was not said... sometimes that means more than what is said, IMO.

All MOO

 

[dotr]

"They have no-nothing" comment, kind of diminishes the integrity of the " They have no DNA comment" imo.

 

[Sillybilly]

IMO, LE either has no DNA, or has DNA that cannot include or exclude persons known to Audrey for some reason. How likely is it that a perp could NOT leave DNA at such a violent crime scene?

IMO, either the crime was meticulously planned to include avoiding leaving DNA evidence at the scene, or the only DNA present is from friends/associates who were known to have visited Audrey inside her home (which might explain LE's theory that it is someone known to her). IIRC, the only other person we know was in Audrey's home was the fellow who installed Audrey's new convection oven. If PK can't remember who it was, surely there is someone else who could help identify that unknown person.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Here's what I'm having trouble understanding: How could virtually no one have been inside AG's house for the past (let's say) 20 years? Only PK and the convection oven guy/gal? And her dogs. And LV perhaps once.

AG's house was fairly old - wouldn't a meter reader have had to come inside? How about the person who installed the air conditioning? And the person who brought in the big TV. Or did PK do ALL of that carrying and installing?

Thoughts, anyone?

 

[Sillybilly]

Yes, this man has his problems and he's "different". Having problems and being "different" does not make one a murderer. He was an easy fall guy for LE at the time. And, it's my OPINION that the killer knew LE would zero in on this man.

from:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=pmh... gleave" hrab "homeless man" reporter&f=false

"Neighbours say they have seen a homeless man in an abandoned barn down the road" ... "I am aware of a homeless man that has taken up residence there ..."

Yes, would be interesting to know which neighbours had previously talked about this homeless man, but ... I interpret the above exchange between the reporter and Hrab to indicate that Hrab was already aware of him. So specifically who was it that initially put the bug about DLS in Hrab's ear?

DLS' neighbours were familiar with him and didn't seem all that concerned about his presence in their neighbourhood:

from:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2011/01/03/police_search_barn_after_teachers_brutal_murder.html

Neighbours who live next to the abandoned barn say they knew a homeless man was living there and would see him from time to time. They never expected the barn would be the scene of an expansive investigation and manhunt.

“I never used to worry about locking my doors,” said Anne-Marie Baillie. “Then when you see them three doors down doing this, it makes me worry more.”

The homeless man told Baillie and her husband, Dave, that he had permission to stay in the barn in return for cleaning it out.

And from that same article, just a nice little snippet I hadn't read before:

Bernie Vliestra, who lives in the area, used to skate on the pond on Gleave’s property growing up.

“We’re a close community,” he said. “We’re all brainstorming about how and why it happened.”

 

[Woodland]

How likely is it that a perp could NOT leave DNA at such a violent crime scene?

... either the crime was meticulously planned to include avoiding leaving DNA evidence at the scene ...

Snipped for brevity.

Bingo for me.

Perps have always found a way to get a leg-up on LE, then LE finds a way to get a leg-up on perps, then perps find a new way to get a leg-up on LE, then ....

I think of it as - welcome to the age of the WWW.

FWIW - the best way to add a new tool for LE is to allow everyone's DNA to be in a databank. It won't solve all of the crimes, but it will help. Imo.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Bingo from me as well. There simply HAD to be DNA. But................from what we've been told, very few people were ever inside AG's house in order to leave DNA and therefore, be eliminated by LE.


:scared:

 

[Sillybilly]

Here's what I'm having trouble understanding: How could virtually no one have been inside AG's house for the past (let's say) 20 years? Only PK and the convection oven guy/gal? And her dogs. And LV perhaps once.

AG's house was fairly old - wouldn't a meter reader have had to come inside? How about the person who installed the air conditioning? And the person who brought in the big TV. Or did PK do ALL of that carrying and installing?

Thoughts, anyone?

I'm not aware of any home that has the hydro meter inside. Now, the meter reader would have occasion to be up close to the exterior of the home. (Does Ontario Hydro do estimates in the winter or are actual readings done each and every month?)

As for the AC, PK said Audrey didn't like to turn it on, [modsnip], so presumably it was old and installed years ago. If it wasn't working properly when the house was sold, it doesn't sound like it was serviced recently. If LV was only in the home once, presumably her DNA would have been dusted off at some point (unless she was inside when the soup was delivered).

IIRC, there were "big screen TVs" (plural, so yes, who brought them in and set them up, and when?). By PK's info, he's been in pretty much every major room in the house so that would explain his DNA all over the place.

 

[Woodland]

Sorry NSU, have to disagree 'There simply HAD to be DNA'.

Meticulously planned is the key here imo - this is why AG's case fascinates me. It may be the almost perfect crime, imo. What I think are mistakes by the killer will not prove they are the killer - only point to that fact. Closing the garage door and having the dogs remain caged are 2 that come to mind. No DNA would be a red flag to me - that should be impossible if not planned.

Perps are getting smarter - don't leave DNA and you can't be named a suspect. Seems to be a full stop there imo. You can then be cocky, insert yourself in the investigation etc - all things that 'use' to be a problem.

 

[greenthumb]

I would assume that there is dna other than AG's in the house for exactly the reasons outlined here - there must have been some people in that home at some time. But in terms of unexplained dna not linked to known visitors, perhaps not. So again, I am reading into the lawyer's statement to mean "no dna of evidentiary value". JMO

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

 

[Woodland]

Agree greenthumb - DNA has to be at or part of the crime scene. In the home won't do it.

 

[dotr]

Wonder if Audrey's bridge playing cards are still around?
Googling bridge and murder, not expecting to find anything, but instead found several surprisingly. Seems like the sort of game that can really get violently competitive even between spouses, imo.
Is betting ever involved in the game ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-10778641
"A former world championship bridge player has been jailed for life for murdering his wife in a knife attack.

Stephen Green, 52, stabbed Carole Green, 57, 100 times at their flat in Lytham St Annes, Lancashire.

A jury at Preston Crown Court took 75 minutes to convict the former British Aerospace worker after a week-long trial.

The murder followed his constant criticism of her card-playing."


Bridge Murder case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"After sharing dinner, they sat down to a game of bridge in the Bennett living room, the couples playing as partners, the Hofmans versus the Bennetts. After midnight, as the Hofmans began to pull ahead, the Bennetts began to bicker. In the ultimate hand, John failed to make his four spades contract and Myrtle, frustrated by the failure, called him “a bum bridge player".

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Quoted from Woodland:

Sorry NSU, have to disagree 'There simply HAD to be DNA'.



Indeed. I've been thinking this over. Perps have learned to shave their bodies completely, wear body suits, wear bathing caps......anything to not leave DNA at the scene.

PK's DNA is in nearly every room in the house but the 911 people asked him to go back to look for a pulse. So, it's my OPINION that his DNA will be somewhere at the death/crime scene, too.

:twocents:

 

[Sillybilly]

PK's DNA is in nearly every room in the house but the 911 people asked him to go back to look for a pulse. So, it's my OPINION that his DNA will be somewhere at the death/crime scene, too.

:twocents:

<rsbm>

Just a slight variation between what PK stated in his post here at WS compared to how JW relates the information:

In PK's post, he states:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Audrey Gleave, retired teacher, viciously murdered in home, Ancaster Ontario, #2

I bent over her to feel for a pulse (this was my only contact with her) and immediately left the scene again.

In JW's article, it is said:

from:
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/2216816-audrey-s-story-continues/

He returned to the garage, knelt down and felt for a pulse.

Difference between bending or kneeling, and IMO could influence where his DNA might be in relation to the body, or whether or not there was any blood residue or other evidence on his pant leg.

 

[Woodland]

With all due respect - should we go there? We need the thread up and running?

 

[Sillybilly]

With all due respect - should we go there? We need the thread up and running?

We were discussing DNA that may or may not be found at the crime scene. I don't think it's surprising that the DNA of the person who found Audrey's body and checked her pulse should be found at the scene. Whether he was kneeling or bending should indicate to what degree and in what pattern his DNA should be found. IMO, consideration of the absence or presence of his DNA is neither intended to be prejudicial nor exculpatory .. it's simply one factor to be considered as possibly/probably existing at the scene.

JMO, [modsnip].

 

[dotr]

Still wonder what sort of evidence LE was looking for when they tested Audrey's dogs and also would be interesting to know what, if anything was found.