CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #9

[dotr]

Almost wondering if AG was held captive for a couple of days in a sort of DV type situation.
Maybe she quietly dated online and possibly with good reason, guy creeped her out- and she became paranoid about sharing her email with people?
What if someone presumed AG was much younger because she was a student, found out otherwise and went berserk? imo.

Forcing AG to cancel plans, maybe even hiding in the house when people visited?
random thoughts, fwiw.

 

[deugirtni]

Wondering if LV's shoes were ever taken for testing, and if not, why not? Afterall, LV was the last person known to see her alive, and was also the only beneficiary of AG's estate. It wouldn't seem fair or right to me, if they only tested the shoes/feet of males, but not the person checking both of the above boxes. If LV were a male, my bet is LE would've asked for THOSE shoes.

Is it not possible as well that AG, obviously knowing pretty much exactly when LV was to arrive (because she had written in her email to PK that LV would be arriving any minute), may have put her coat and 'sneakers' on to await her friend's arrival, and possibly also opened the garage door for her to let her know to come to that area? That would also answer the question as to why AG was in the garage and wearing her coat. LE says they believe AG was killed on the 27th, and that day was also the 27th. To top it off, the house was cleaned (presumably), cleared out, and sold within about one month after AG's death - could it have moved any faster? Was there a rush for some reason? And then we learn that LV moved away from the area.

A whole lot of 'coincidences', and of course, it would be unusual if a female, a mother, might be capable of committing savage acts, or staging a reportedly horrific scene with a 'sexual component', but here we are. Let the evidence fall where it may, right? Except did LE even EVER interview the neighbours? It had been reported that neighbours hadn't been interviewed, their outbuildings hadn't been searched, neighbours were concerned about not being interviewed, and even LE not following up on a call a neighbour had made to police reporting something of concern/interest regarding the case. That was fantastic that LE had a great-sounding lead in regard to the homeless man shacking up in an abandoned barn nearby, but did it need to be at the expense of all other potential leads?

I read one early article that said:

Neighbours suspect it could be a young man who often helped Gleave with odd jobs around her house.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/01/02/16733986.html

Why would 'neighbours' have suspected this... wouldn't it have been valuable for police to know why? Yet from the sounds of it, LE didn't bother with the neighbours.
=================
From an article published Feb.08,2011, so about 5 1/2 weeks after AG's murder:

On the day Gleave’s body was found, he said, an officer knocked on his door and asked him a couple of questions. But Ascroft said the conversation was vague and he was never given a specific timeline to recall what he might have seen.

Since that day, he has called one of the detectives to share new information, but has never had a call back, he said.

“Nobody’s gone door-to-door, they don’t even know whose living with me,” Ascroft said. “If they talked to people, they might get much more information.”

Ascroft and neighbour Cam Ferguson also question why they’ve never seen neighbouring properties in the densely forested area searched.

In the last month, Gleave’s Indian Trail house has been sold in an estate sale. ....
....
Two days after Gleave’s body was discovered, homicide detectives searched the barn where Scott had been staying.
It's been six weeks Audrey Gleave's murder and neighbours are anxious

 

[whiterhino]

Almost wondering if AG was held captive for a couple of days in a sort of DV type situation.
Maybe she quietly dated online and possibly with good reason, guy creeped her out- and she became paranoid about sharing her email with people?
What if someone presumed AG was much younger because she was a student, found out otherwise and went berserk? imo.

Forcing AG to cancel plans, maybe even hiding in the house when people visited?
random thoughts, fwiw.

Idk but I have wondered if maybe Audrey hadn't had some kind of "holiday blast from the past". Maybe someone from her past saw her around town before she got sick and decided to pay her a visit? Like those Hallmark movies but with a dark twist. Probably not likely.

Wouldn't Audreys' dogs have alerted to someone lurking around? You'd think they would have prevented her from going to the door, going outside etc.

 

[whiterhino]

Wondering if LV's shoes were ever taken for testing, and if not, why not? Afterall, LV was the last person known to see her alive, and was also the only beneficiary of AG's estate. It wouldn't seem fair or right to me, if they only tested the shoes/feet of males, but not the person checking both of the above boxes. If LV were a male, my bet is LE would've asked for THOSE shoes.

Is it not possible as well that AG, obviously knowing pretty much exactly when LV was to arrive (because she had written in her email to PK that LV would be arriving any minute), may have put her coat and 'sneakers' on to await her friend's arrival, and possibly also opened the garage door for her to let her know to come to that area? That would also answer the question as to why AG was in the garage and wearing her coat. LE says they believe AG was killed on the 27th, and that day was also the 27th. To top it off, the house was cleaned (presumably), cleared out, and sold within about one month after AG's death - could it have moved any faster? Was there a rush for some reason? And then we learn that LV moved away from the area.

A whole lot of 'coincidences', and of course, it would be unusual if a female, a mother, might be capable of committing savage acts, or staging a reportedly horrific scene with a 'sexual component', but here we are. Let the evidence fall where it may, right? Except did LE even EVER interview the neighbours? It had been reported that neighbours hadn't been interviewed, their outbuildings hadn't been searched, neighbours were concerned about not being interviewed, and even LE not following up on a call a neighbour had made to police reporting something of concern/interest regarding the case. That was fantastic that LE had a great-sounding lead in regard to the homeless man shacking up in an abandoned barn nearby, but did it need to be at the expense of all other potential leads?

I read one early article that said:

Neighbours suspect it could be a young man who often helped Gleave with odd jobs around her house.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/01/02/16733986.html

Why would 'neighbours' have suspected this... wouldn't it have been valuable for police to know why? Yet from the sounds of it, LE didn't bother with the neighbours.
=================
From an article published Feb.08,2011, so about 5 1/2 weeks after AG's murder:

On the day Gleave’s body was found, he said, an officer knocked on his door and asked him a couple of questions. But Ascroft said the conversation was vague and he was never given a specific timeline to recall what he might have seen.

Since that day, he has called one of the detectives to share new information, but has never had a call back, he said.

“Nobody’s gone door-to-door, they don’t even know whose living with me,” Ascroft said. “If they talked to people, they might get much more information.”

Ascroft and neighbour Cam Ferguson also question why they’ve never seen neighbouring properties in the densely forested area searched.

In the last month, Gleave’s Indian Trail house has been sold in an estate sale. ....
....
Two days after Gleave’s body was discovered, homicide detectives searched the barn where Scott had been staying.
It's been six weeks Audrey Gleave's murder and neighbours are anxious

Why would LV wait until now to do something like this? I agree, everything moved fairly quickly and it is a bit odd that LV moved away shortly after. Maybe there was a financial motive? Maybe LV had some financial issues of her own or was padding her nest?

It would be hard to wrap my head around a woman doing this to another older woman for financial gain but stranger things have happened. The crime itself has certain elements that IMO would be unnecessary unless the person doing it wanted to degrade the victim or an attempt to throw off LE. Or both. This is entirely possible IMO.

What a weird statement for that neighbour to make. Why would he say "they don't know who is living with me" and "they might get more information if the talk to people"? Who was living with him? What kind of information? If anyone knew anything, why would they wait for LE to approach them?

I don't want to write anymore about what I think of the soup or what was in it etc. Probably against TOS!

 

[FromGermany1]

Not to correct you but do you mean to ask "How did LE know" in regard to AG possibly wearing a bra that was then taken? If we're going with items of clothing, I'm guessing underwear.

This is pretty much the exact kind of thing taken after an assault like that. Also the kind of common item that LE would notice missing that would normally be there (?). Maybe whoever took it kept it for later? I hate writing that. Disgusting.

JMO but I don't think it was staged. It's just so creepy to imagine anyone stalking someone in the middle of the night, middle of winter, with the intent to murder them, just waiting outside. Then, to do what was done, to have that level of energy and "motivation"... to be able to walk away and live as if it never happened?! Who indeed, right?

How did they (LE) know - okay!
We have seen a pic of AG, she seemed to have taken by herself, looking into a big mirror, dressed with a white shirt. It looked, as if she wasn't wearing a bra. If she saved the pic, it wasn't embarrassing to her, and it's 100% okay for me. I would know best, that women her age (have myself arrived at that age, plus 1 now) often can't bear to wear the bra. So, if her bra was missing, it says nothing. Unless LE found half of a bra perhaps?
IF the perp wanted to stage a s.a., he would have taken the bra, given there was one. IMO
I can't imagine a perp, who plans to stage a s.a. and isn't sexually interested indeed, would take her more intimate underwear. Though, if there was no bra, he had to think about another sign for s.a., that's right.

 

[FromGermany1]

Why would LV wait until now to do something like this? I agree, everything moved fairly quickly and it is a bit odd that LV moved away shortly after. Maybe there was a financial motive? Maybe LV had some financial issues of her own or was padding her nest?

It would be hard to wrap my head around a woman doing this to another older woman for financial gain but stranger things have happened. The crime itself has certain elements that IMO would be unnecessary unless the person doing it wanted to degrade the victim or an attempt to throw off LE. Or both. This is entirely possible IMO.

What a weird statement for that neighbour to make. Why would he say "they don't know who is living with me" and "they might get more information if the talk to people"? Who was living with him? What kind of information? If anyone knew anything, why would they wait for LE to approach them?

I don't want to write anymore about what I think of the soup or what was in it etc. Probably against TOS!

bbm
I'm taking over, speaking a little bit about the soup.
The soup was brought by LV to AG. As LV was only 1x there at Indian Trail, AG had still the container, one must assume. Maybe of course, AG had to pour the soup from LV's vessel into her own, because LV wanted the vessel back immediately. LE would know, if. We don't know as always. In any case: nobody helped AG to clean up the one container or the other, I think.
If the pathologist didn't examine the content of AG's stomach, that would be a big fail, IMO.

 

[Catmommy]

Audrey, we haven't forgotten you. Your death still affects us. We want whoever committed your foul murder to be revealed and punished. Hoping that time is soon.

 

[whiterhino]

bbm
I'm taking over, speaking a little bit about the soup.
The soup was brought by LV to AG. As LV was only 1x there at Indian Trail, AG had still the container, one must assume. Maybe of course, AG had to pour the soup from LV's vessel into her own, because LV wanted the vessel back immediately. LE would know, if. We don't know as always. In any case: nobody helped AG to clean up the one container or the other, I think.
If the pathologist didn't examine the content of AG's stomach, that would be a big fail, IMO.

Here are my thoughts: We really cannot say. Most people want their Tupperware back. Many people will share food in cheap plastic so they don't lose their "good plastic". LV could have used this as an excuse to return later, for the container. Of course she'd have to go over unannounced in order to prevent AG from telling anyone (PK). This scenario is possible to me.

There was no way to ensure that Audrey would eat the soup so the idea of poisoning her food seems unlikely. It's too risky IMO.

I think after a certain amount of time, stomach contents cannot be used? There are other ways to detect poison but I don't think there was anything to find.

 

[jobo]

Well, just at the beginning of November, this year..40 yr.old Ludmila Auclair (40) was charged with the murder of Ruth Humphries (67) Oshawa.
They were known to each other, but not friends. I would imagine this murder was for money, but they haven’t said.

sorry I tried to add a quote, and messed it up.

 

[dotr]

Well, just at the beginning of November, this year..40 yr.old Ludmila Auclair (40) was charged with the murder of Ruth Humphries (67) Oshawa.
They were known to each other, but not friends. I would imagine this murder was for money, but they haven’t said.

sorry I tried to add a quote, and messed it up.

Nov 2021
''Durham police say the body Ruth Humphries was found in a home on Philip Murray Avenue, in the southern part of Oshawa, around 3:30 p.m. Tuesday after a young child returned to find their grandmother deceased.

Investigators initially ruled the death suspicious and a post mortem revealed significant trauma to the victim’s body that was not consistent with an accidental fall or self-inflicted injuries.''

On Friday, police arrested 40-year-old Ludmila Auclair of Oshawa and have charged her with second-degree murder.

 

[deugirtni]

Here are my thoughts: We really cannot say. Most people want their Tupperware back. Many people will share food in cheap plastic so they don't lose their "good plastic". LV could have used this as an excuse to return later, for the container. Of course she'd have to go over unannounced in order to prevent AG from telling anyone (PK). This scenario is possible to me.

There was no way to ensure that Audrey would eat the soup so the idea of poisoning her food seems unlikely. It's too risky IMO.

I think after a certain amount of time, stomach contents cannot be used? There are other ways to detect poison but I don't think there was anything to find.

Just thinking on the soup. It's possible that AG told her friend LV when she dropped off the soup, that she'd have it for her dinner that evening... but LE possibly found the soup still intact, uneaten. That, along with possibly checking status of stomach contents at autopsy, and other postmortem bodily changes, may be why LE believe she was killed that same day.

But if the soup-bearing visitor also happened to be the unexpected killer, that would also explain the intact soup. It's possible AG may have taken the soup right away into the kitchen, but then come right back with coat on to sit on the bench in the garage for a quick chat with her friend? I wonder if the soup-bearing visitor may have had someone along for the ride, and if those shoes were also examined. Afterall, it was the holiday season and likely lots of visiting going on.

Did one of LV's boxing-day dinner guests overhear something about AG's estate being left to LV, and decide to make LV come into that inheritance faster than what would have occurred naturally, because they wanted to borrow or be gifted some cash for themselves from LV? Is it possible such a dinner guest may have covertly followed LV out to AG's that morning, and then returned a few hours later?

It's difficult to be confident that LE did all their due diligence if the homeless man came to their attention very quickly and all energies then became focused on him, while neighbours complained of police not responding to their calls and etc. imo.

 

[dotr]

Well, just at the beginning of November, this year..40 yr.old Ludmila Auclair (40) was charged with the murder of Ruth Humphries (67) Oshawa.
They were known to each other, but not friends. I would imagine this murder was for money, but they haven’t said.

sorry I tried to add a quote, and messed it up.

So did i (mess up), forgot to add the link to my above post.
CityNews

 

[FromGermany1]

Just thinking on the soup. It's possible that AG told her friend LV when she dropped off the soup, that she'd have it for her dinner that evening... but LE possibly found the soup still intact, uneaten. That, along with possibly checking status of stomach contents at autopsy, and other postmortem bodily changes, may be why LE believe she was killed that same day.

But if the soup-bearing visitor also happened to be the unexpected killer, that would also explain the intact soup. It's possible AG may have taken the soup right away into the kitchen, but then come right back with coat on to sit on the bench in the garage for a quick chat with her friend? I wonder if the soup-bearing visitor may have had someone along for the ride, and if those shoes were also examined. Afterall, it was the holiday season and likely lots of visiting going on.

Did one of LV's boxing-day dinner guests overhear something about AG's estate being left to LV, and decide to make LV come into that inheritance faster than what would have occurred naturally, because they wanted to borrow or be gifted some cash for themselves from LV? Is it possible such a dinner guest may have covertly followed LV out to AG's that morning, and then returned a few hours later?

It's difficult to be confident that LE did all their due diligence if the homeless man came to their attention very quickly and all energies then became focused on him, while neighbours complained of police not responding to their calls and etc. imo.

Who might have something overheard at the family meeting at LV's home, where AG was invited and took part of, was LV's nephew JV. We talked about him already. Moved to Florida sometime.
ETA: His shoes certainly weren't tested for it's prints, as so many other shoes, probably.

 

[deugirtni]

Who might have something overheard at the family meeting at LV's home, where AG was invited and took part of, was LV's nephew JV. We talked about him already. Moved to Florida sometime.
ETA: His shoes certainly weren't tested for it's prints, as so many other shoes, probably.

Was it a nephew? I had in my mind it was an offspring?

 

[2soccermom]

Although the exact date and time of Audrey's demise is in question, LE believes it likely she was murdered in the afternoon or early evening of Dec 27, as per Who killed Audrey Gleave?

Audrey deserves justice. I hope we will see it come this year, despite that it feels a long way away....

I have been watching a few un/solved crime shows this holiday and I'm actually feeling a wee bit heartened that Audrey's and Sonia's cases can yet be solved. I'm not sure what it will take -- but it's probably worth reminding people that if you have any of those nagging feelings re: something you saw or heard to call it in. (On one of the shows, investigators were following up with interviews on the murder of a family, and a woman wanted to share a detail about a man inquiring re: how to sell a vehicle with a bullet hole in it; her husband thought that was nonsense info, since it seemed irrelevant to him to the crime. It turns out that was an exact "hold back" detail that made it possible for LE to zero in on the killer, and her "offhand" comment about it to LE is what ultimately broke the case open.) So anyone who has an "inner voice" speaking, or is just simply wondering if info they have is pertinent, should just go for it and let LE assess usefulness. (Info might also become relevant later, as new info or developments emerge.)
Sigh. I hope we'll hear if there has been any progress on Audrey's case at this 11th-year mark.

 

[dotr]

Hamilton-area Femicides
These are just some of the faces of slain women and girls from the Hamilton area since the 1980's.
Femicide roll call: Hamilton-area women and girls killed
'Dec. 07, 2021
These are just some of the faces of slain women and girls from the Hamilton area since the 1970s.''

Audrey Gleave, killed 2010.Hamilton Spectator file photo

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Audrey, your case still puzzles me greatly. I've returned to WS because you are still on my mind. This case MUST be solved, One day!

 

[dotr]

Audrey, your case still puzzles me greatly. I've returned to WS because you are still on my mind. This case MUST be solved, One day!

Long time No_ Stone_Unturned, welcome back!

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Thank you. I’m still obsessed by the unsolved deaths of Sonia Varaschin and Audrey Gleave. Still puzzled by the attack on that female artist in Mono ON. No one has been arrested for these three and, I believe, they are related. Yes, I’m still banging that drum but my gut tells me not to let it go.

I took a break from WS after the Montreal “cannibal “ thing. However Audrey keeps bringing me back. Let’s get this thing solved.

PS. It’s nice to see so many of you are still here.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

I’m rereading a lot of this info to refresh my memory. The soup. The cake. The song, Amazing Grace.
Is PK still posting here?