CANADA Canada - Elizabeth Bain, 22, Scarborough Ont, 19 June 1990 #1

[SecretSource]

Any thoughts on EB's wallet left in her room?

One of many mysteries but perhaps not. With the withdrawal from the ATM having taken place earlier that day she wouldn't have needed the wallet to make a purchase. The fact that her driver's license was in her wallet is a tad stranger but it does suggest that she wasn't planning on doing a lot of driving that night; this suggests she was either planning on going out that afternoon/early evening for a few hours with a person she likely met in the valley or she figured she would just be a few minutes going to UTSC and back therefore why bother? I'm inclined to believe the former given the cash withdrawal and EB telling RB that she was having dinner that night; very likely that there were dinner plans or plans of some kind but just not with AC but the likely killer; AC was a good cover story in the event RB went to the class and noticed her absence as the best lies told are ones that are half true.

I should also add that with her mother home that day and working outside, if EB's plans were to meet someone it would make sense that said meeting was with a man other than RB, that the meeting would have to have taken place away elsewhere, and that EB would have to drive there to meet them; otherwise, her mother would wonder who this person was and why EB was getting into the car of a man who wasn't RB. If there had been a pre-arranged meeting with RB, it also doesn't make sense given that he could have simply picked her up, taken her to class and brought her back home as he did in previous weeks; or, he could have simply met EB after her class. If EB lied about her reason for going to UTSC that night - maybe she did, maybe she didn't - she certainly wouldn't have had any reason not to tell her mother that she was going there to meet RB.

The REAL mystery is why she would have stopped writing in her diary a month before her disappearance - a diary that she had kept in various forms for seven years and that she obviously wanted to preserve. We know that last entry was on the back of the May 15th entry and that EB always wrote front to back so why stop suddenly, unless perhaps there were things going on that she couldn't bring herself to record in it in the event it comes back to haunt her? Thoughts?

 

[eyesonly]

One of many mysteries but perhaps not. With the withdrawal from the ATM having taken place earlier that day she wouldn't have needed the wallet to make a purchase. The fact that her driver's license was in her wallet is a tad stranger but it does suggest that she wasn't planning on doing a lot of driving that night; this suggests she was either planning on going out that afternoon/early evening for a few hours with a person she likely met in the valley or she figured she would just be a few minutes going to UTSC and back therefore why bother? I'm inclined to believe the former given the cash withdrawal and EB telling RB that she was having dinner that night; very likely that there were dinner plans or plans of some kind but just not with AC but the likely killer; AC was a good cover story in the event RB went to the class and noticed her absence as the best lies told are ones that are half true.

I should also add that with her mother home that day and working outside, if EB's plans were to meet someone it would make sense that said meeting was with a man other than RB, that the meeting would have to have taken place away elsewhere, and that EB would have to drive there to meet them; otherwise, her mother would wonder who this person was and why EB was getting into the car of a man who wasn't RB. If there had been a pre-arranged meeting with RB, it also doesn't make sense given that he could have simply picked her up, taken her to class and brought her back home as he did in previous weeks; or, he could have simply met EB after her class. If EB lied about her reason for going to UTSC that night - maybe she did, maybe she didn't - she certainly wouldn't have had any reason not to tell her mother that she was going there to meet RB.

The REAL mystery is why she would have stopped writing in her diary a month before her disappearance - a diary that she had kept in various forms for seven years and that she obviously wanted to preserve. We know that last entry was on the back of the May 15th entry and that EB always wrote front to back so why stop suddenly, unless perhaps there were things going on that she couldn't bring herself to record in it in the event it comes back to haunt her? Thoughts?

In the book john camunias says that when he was talking to her on the phone that " I got the impression she was high " ( not verbatim I think )
JS from the book says he found what he believes were marijuana seeds in her shoe.
EB from her diary seemed obsessed with her weight and physical appearance both out and inward.

EB's car was sighted by Collins (if valid sighting ) in front of 3r auto and then found across street from 3r auto, and that area was deemed a "bad" area in 1990 by local people who have been recently talked to and were around in 1990 and clearly remember what that little area was like back then, re drugs.

Andre from her diary as one of the guys who keeps calling, if memory serves me correct EB's sister CB (fr NCTM ) says she thought he might be into drugs or EB told her sister that thought. As far as we know Andre has never come forward or been located

Is it possible EB got involved in drugs in that past month, maybe starting with weed and then something more,
That might be something EB wouldn't want to write in her diary

Also the cut off filter from the cig in the car. Maybe the $80 was to purchase something from the drug culture

??????

 

[SecretSource]

MV lady who was attracted to Liz's car finger thingies around 620pm, saw pack of cigs on passenger seat, when RB looked in at 645pm he doesn't state seeing a pack of cigs.

The pack of cigs shows up in the glove compartment when car is found.

Thoughts and theories?

It doesn't make sense and IMO MV didn't see them but instead incorporated post-event information into a sighting that otherwise does seem fairly solid, although being able to time and date a sighting so innocuous a la MP does seem a little iffy to me. MV's sighting corroborates RB's sighting - which helps him - but it does introduce an interesting conflict in that RB says he didn't see the pack of cigs, she says she did, and there is no reason why he would have failed to mention them if he had seen them. The police had a bit of a problem in that as mentioned previously, RB was the only person to have seen her car that in the valley so by disclosing this fact he was, in effect, placing himself at the scene of the crime. Not something guilty people do. So wouldn't it be convenient if someone else saw the car as well - robbing RB of this argument - but who also contradicted him at the same time. Pretty sweet if you ask me.

EB's father first introduced MV to the police and may have, much like he did with MP, his own daughter, NS, SA and many others, passed along information that was ultimately incorporated into witness testimony; and if not EB's father, then perhaps LE and the prosecution, who would have been more than willing to trade a sighting that corroborated RB for a one that also contradicted him in another respect and lent credence to the theory that EB was killed in the valley given that if Woodside is right and EB was killed outside of the valley she would likely have taken the pack with her after meeting her killer at roughly 4:30 PM and heading somewhere else. Not to mention that it also suggests that they were hers and not the killer's - how convenient given RB's known hatred for smoking. This doesn't mean that MV is lying and there could be an innocent explanation, but even the most honest witness can end up saying the exact opposite of what they originally observed, as NCTM makes clear. Every material witness questioned first gave statements that were far more helpful than hurtful to RB and would have likely been defense witnesses had they limited their testimony to what they originally reported. Perz. Dibben, Singleton. Nadon. They ALL gave statements that helped RB far more than hurt him; however, interview them multiple times, tell them that RB did it, make suggestions to try to squeeze out just a little more, hypnosis, and - presto! - now you've got a Crown witness.

Long story short: I don't think she saw them, there is no logical reason nor is there any reason why RB wouldn't have seen them.

P.S. If he had seen them, he certainly could have used them to his advantage, i.e. when asked "Why did you think she might have been there with another man?" and "Why so suspicious?" he could have simply responded that he saw cigarettes in the car and neither he nor EB smoked. "Why wouldn't I have been suspicious?"

 

[Snively]

CB had mentioned at one point that she thought Andre was some guy who also jogged in the park that EB liked to jog in.

The little park beside 3r was also considered a good make out spot. Kind of a quiet, industrial area after dark, but lit enough it was never considered that dangerous. A few years later it got a bad rep when the bikers moved in to one of the houses down the road from 3r, but they were not there, nor even a biker gang until 1994 or 1995.

While I wouldn't be surprised that she had smoked the occasional joint, she was also very health conscious and would never have been even remotely considered an addict or even an everyday user. I always figured the filter off the cigarette was exactly what you thought eyesonly, and also makes sense of the cigarettes in the first place. But, also she was known to have the occasional cigarette just like a lot of people did. Smoking was nowhere near the taboo then like it's pretty much considered now.

I've heard the drug deal gone bad theory as well, but I don't put a lot, if any merit, in it. A stranger would not move the body. They would have no need to move that body. The person who killed her moved the body because they fear they could be associated to the victim or the location that the crime happened. One more reason I never bought the Bernardo theory. He had a barely tenuous connection to EB outside of possibly meeting her to say hello, 5 years previously.

 

[eyesonly]

No reflection on RB whatsoever with regards to his truthfulness of that night in regards to the cigs question. I believe the cigs were not there when RB looked in.
I'm thinking of it more of a timeline that someone came to the car between MV sighting and RB sighting.
Possible timeline for EB leaving the park area with someone else around 630pm and then returning to her car later.

Yes as per witness first statements and then being guided by LE so they eventually aide them in their quest for RBs conviction.

As for MV and the fingers, that's why I am curious as to if there is any information in regards to which way EB's car was parked on the valley lot. Driven in or backed in

Snively, my post about the drug issue was only in regards to a possible theory as to why she may have stopped writing in her diary as per secretsources question as to theories
It was not a theory on a drug based killer

 

[eyesonly]

EB was not killed in the valley
RB was truthful in his whereabouts and times on the day/evening EB disappeared
LE railroaded RB from the beginning before they even found the car they had tunnel vision on him
LE lied to the Bain family about having "evidence" of RB's guilt
LE lied to RBs family and friends and all the witnesses about having 'evidence ' of RBs guilt
LE knowing hid crucial witness sightings to make RB look like a liar ( guy waiting at EB's class) and witness sighting that would have cooberated another sighting at a time LE knew for a fact RB had an alibi in the gym ( 401 nobrega sighting would have cooberated Collins sighting)
LE knowingly put a false theory forward for RBs guilt that they knew and were told by the CFS was impossible as it pertains to the forensic blood evidence
CFS imo held back pertinent information by not coming forward with their blood evidence conclusions that directly contradicted LE theory of the crime. And because " no one asked"doesn't wash. They have a responsibility for the truth
LE det raybould knowing falsified his notes to hide the CFS facts ( always thought that was a crime)
which means the detectives both committed purgery ( another crime I thought )

Now imagine how much more there is that we haven't uncovered yet.

RB was tried and convicted as soon as the car was found, LE used the Bains as a sympathy tool for their case. If the victims family was on board then a conviction would be determined in the media long before it got to court.

The idea that someone is innocent until proven guilty is a bs fantasy. It is not real and not how our justice system works
Convict first and figure out innocence or guilt later

Society owes RB a massive apology for failing his constitutional rights to a fair and truthful process.
We should all be ashamed and we all bear the burden for innocent people spending even one day in jail let alone years,

Yeah I just wrote all that

 

[SecretSource]

In the book john camunias says that when he was talking to her on the phone that " I got the impression she was high " ( not verbatim I think )
JS from the book says he found what he believes were marijuana seeds in her shoe.
EB from her diary seemed obsessed with her weight and physical appearance both out and inward.

EB's car was sighted by Collins (if valid sighting ) in front of 3r auto and then found across street from 3r auto, and that area was deemed a "bad" area in 1990 by local people who have been recently talked to and were around in 1990 and clearly remember what that little area was like back then, re drugs.

Andre from her diary as one of the guys who keeps calling, if memory serves me correct EB's sister CB (fr NCTM ) says she thought he might be into drugs or EB told her sister that thought. As far as we know Andre has never come forward or been located

Is it possible EB got involved in drugs in that past month, maybe starting with weed and then something more,
That might be something EB wouldn't want to write in her diary

Also the cut off filter from the cig in the car. Maybe the $80 was to purchase something from the drug culture

??????

John Camunias was a tad strange and was likely embellishing; EB's family would likely know about something like this and with EB's father's sensitivity to smoke I suspect he would know as well. It would have been grossly out of character for EB to have fallen into a drug habit, even one as innocuous as marijuana but if so, that might indeed merit omission from the diary. RB and AC both stated that even smoking would have been out of character and even though family members suggested otherwise in light of other lies and EB's father's attempts to manufacture evidence consistent with the prosecution, it would cause one to question anything family members or their boyfriends/girlfriends had to say.

Collins sighting is curious and shouldn't be written off IMO; thus, it is possible that EB fell into the wrong crowd that congregated in that area and that led to her downfall. As a side note, Collins was likely usable but abandoned when LE realized MS could prove that RB was in the weightroom post-7:15 PM after all and couldn't have been with EB in that time frame. It made sense that the Crown ultimately settled on the "killed before 7:00 PM" theory because otherwise, why was EB was alive at 8:00 PM and not in RB's company? Why not simply meet each other after their respective workouts and class?

Per Andre, I'm not sure. Maybe yes, maybe no. Not a strong opinion one way or the other.

One possibility is that sometime in the weeks prior to EB's disappearance she met someone and that person, thinking that EB was single and obviously beautiful, started spending time with her and giving her attention; EB, sensing that with RB having issued the ultimatum re holistic medicine that he was thinking of moving on himself so like most beautiful woman who keep a few guys around as a backup plan - EG#2 for example - EB decided to engage in some harmless reciprocation and get a little needed self-esteem boost at the same time. This is something that definitely wouldn't make it into the diary. It may very well be that this mystery man might be the same person that called the Bain home on June 12th - the Tuesday before - and whom EB met with at a strip mall (and where TS saw them arguing while RB waited at home for her to return from dropping her client William off at the group home where she worked.) Maybe it was a replay of 1987 when EB had been dating DO but was spending time with RB - all chronicled in the "Dear John" letter that didn't surface until 2004. Maybe also like in 1987, EB realized that things with this mystery man were getting a little too hot and heavy and wasn't willing to risk losing RB so she arranged to meet said mystery man that night to cut the cord. And maybe unlike RB who walked away in 1987, this man didn't take it too well.

 

[SecretSource]

EB was not killed in the valley

In my opinion, you are absolutely correct.

 

[SecretSource]

CB had mentioned at one point that she thought Andre was some guy who also jogged in the park that EB liked to jog in.

The person who killed her moved the body because they fear they could be associated to the victim or the location that the crime happened. One more reason I never bought the Bernardo theory. He had a barely tenuous connection to EB outside of possibly meeting her to say hello, 5 years previously.

Not necessarily. It wouldn't be out of character for EB to be spending time with a man whose identity was known only to her. Andre anyone? I believe that it was someone known to EB, although it should be noted that neither LM or KF were known to Bernardo and he and KH went to considerable lengths to dispose of any forensic evidence - the former by encasing the LM's body in cement - and the later by cutting off all hair, fingernails etc. Why bother if you're a stranger? Maybe because you're thorough.

But what if EB and Bernardo had been spending time together in the weeks prior to June 19th, 1990? We know that Bernardo was not above cheating on Karla and EB was woman who could stop traffic and was well known in the vicinity of UTSC. Bernardo also dated an EB lookalike U of T student a couple of years before so who's to say he didn't see her one day and decided to make a move? And, if she reciprocated in a friendly way and they went on to spend a little time together he wouldn't have known whether she had mentioned his name to anyone, especially if he thought she was single and that he thought himself worth mentioning. If he was the killer he might not have feared being traced to the body but as Snively points out maybe he might have feared being traced to EB herself. Let's also not forget that the May 16th, 1990 rape yielded a DNA sample; thus, if EB was also sexually assaulted that would mean that they could have connected the crime to the SR. On that note, the three witnesses whose tips to the Sexual Assault squad led police to track down Bernardo for questioning (ironically on the very same day of RBs' s arrest!) had done exactly that themselves. Bernardo's best friend's brother's wife, a woman who worked at the RBC and a former Bernardo girlfriend all told the police that Bernardo was a student at UTSC and probably told the police - we know the girlfriend did - that Bernardo might indeed been EB's killer. We may never know whether this information was relayed to EB's detectives, although it is interesting that the night before Bernardo's interrogation the officer tasked with the interrogation made a late night call to a detective whose initials are SR and who executed the arrest of RB; now THAT would have been quite the conversation.

 

[eyesonly]

EB was not killed in the valley
RB was truthful in his whereabouts and times on the day/evening EB disappeared
LE railroaded RB from the beginning before they even found the car they had tunnel vision on him
LE lied to the Bain family about having "evidence" of RB's guilt
LE lied to RBs family and friends and all the witnesses about having 'evidence ' of RBs guilt
LE knowing hid crucial witness sightings to make RB look like a liar ( guy waiting at EB's class) and witness sighting that would have cooberated another sighting at a time LE knew for a fact RB had an alibi in the gym ( 401 nobrega sighting would have cooberated Collins sighting)
LE knowingly put a false theory forward for RBs guilt that they knew and were told by the CFS was impossible as it pertains to the forensic blood evidence
CFS imo held back pertinent information by not coming forward with their blood evidence conclusions that directly contradicted LE theory of the crime. And because " no one asked"doesn't wash. They have a responsibility for the truth
LE det raybould knowing falsified his notes to hide the CFS facts ( always thought that was a crime)
which means the detectives both committed purgery ( another crime I thought )

Now imagine how much more there is that we haven't uncovered yet.

RB was tried and convicted as soon as the car was found, LE used the Bains as a sympathy tool for their case. If the victims family was on board then a conviction would be determined in the media long before it got to court.

The idea that someone is innocent until proven guilty is a bs fantasy. It is not real and not how our justice system works
Convict first and figure out innocence or guilt later

Society owes RB a massive apology for failing his constitutional rights to a fair and truthful process.
We should all be ashamed and we all bear the burden for innocent people spending even one day in jail let alone years,

Yeah I just wrote all that

Crap sorry accidentally duplicated this post, my bad

 

[SecretSource]

I'm wondering was Liz's car parked in the valley lot frontwards or reversed in?

RB told the police that as he drove past the car he saw the CAA sticker on the back rear bumper so the car had to be parked front forward; also, there was testimony from family members that EB did not habitually park her car by reversing - likely to show that she didn't park the car at Three 'R' Autobody. Also, there wouldn't have been any reason to park the car by reversing it in given that there had been an accident at Old Kingston Rd. that afternoon preventing drivers from accessing the valley from that direction from 5:20 PM to 6:30 PM; hence, her car was the only car there - something else RB told the police. Also, MV likely would have noticed this as well - if she did indeed see the car - and she never mentioned it; she simply stated that she drove in next to the car and parked.

Taken together, I think we can conclude that it was driven in, not backed in.

 

[eyesonly]

Oopsy lol just deleted this post want to rephrase it

 

[Snively]

I always have wondered if the police ever searched the little park beside 3r? I'm not 100% convinced that the murder didn't happen in the parking lot of UofT, but I have always thought the park beside 3r was another possibility where it happened. Whether the body was immediately put into her car or left in the park across from 3r and moved to her car later that night of the 19th is a possibility.

But I would bet that the body was wrapped in a blanket, and probably one from her car. I don't think anybody would want to risk using a blanket of their own, just in case the body was found. A blanket soaking up a lot of the blood would probably account for the minimal blood found in the back of her car. What was found was just what soaked through the blanket. You wouldn't drive with a body in the back and not covered. It's a small car and easy to see down into from a passing truck and there are a lot of gravel pits around if transported north as expected plus a lot of road work at night and therefore trucks on the road.

I know what you meant eyesonly about the drug based killer. But I have heard the theory. I wouldn't doubt for a second that she smoked the odd joint (face it, we all did) or knew someone who did but even though she was naive I just don't think she was the type of person to run with a bad crowd. She wasn't know to miss work or blow off school except for the odd class.

Reading the diary entries that were published, they all seemed to have been written when she was feeling down or depressed and I can't recall if any seemed to be about actual joyous episodes. Even the ones where she seemed somewhat happy, they always seemed to be of conflicted feelings. Were there any breaks of the same length previously? I'm not sure and I don't recall if that was ever established. Why I think there was a break of about 1 month between entries was because she was happy and not about RB but about somebody entirely different. The guilt hadn't hit yet and she was still in the proverbial "honeymoon" stage and I do think she didn't want anybody else to know. Her sister admitted she read her diary sometimes and you can't tell me that Liz didn't think someone was snooping and reading it. Nothing malicious on her sister's part just typical sibling nosiness.

I forgot about that call on the 12th. I wonder if the police ever pulled the LUD's and checked who made that call or any other in the weeks preceding? Or were they so focused on RB they didn't bother? This was before cell phones. Would one of the mystery callers match up with the unidentified fingerprints found in the car?

 

[Snively]

Not necessarily. It wouldn't be out of character for EB to be spending time with a man whose identity was known only to her. Andre anyone? I believe that it was someone known to EB, although it should be noted that neither LM or KF were known to Bernardo and he and KH went to considerable lengths to dispose of any forensic evidence - the former by encasing the LM's body in cement - and the later by cutting off all hair, fingernails etc. Why bother if you're a stranger? Maybe because you're thorough.

Bernardo began hiding the bodies AFTER he and Karla had killed Karla's sister. Even though they claimed that was an accident (and that particular murder of theirs probably was) it wasn't until they decided to move on to actively hunting a victim and grabbing them and taking them home that they felt they needed to hide the bodies. They knew there could be a tie in with their home since the bodies were cut up (feels sick to even write that) at their home. They didn't kill Karla's sister until December 24, 1990 and if they were going to try to hide a body that would likely have been the time. They couldn't do it because her parents were upstairs so they crossed their fingers they could get away with it and call it an accident. And they did. However the next time, they knew they couldn't keep the victims alive because they could both identify Karla and Bernardo and also their house. While Bernardo was certainly violent there is no evidence that he moved onto killing his victims until they actually moved into their own home. The attack on her sister was the second time they did it but the second time they made a mistake. I don't think they meant to kill her sister. Certainly not with her parents upstairs.

Liz's murder still sounds like a crime of opportunity and not planned and somebody felt like they needed to hide her body right away. Bernardo's were planned and body parts moved around to throw things off. Somebody planning it would have put her car probably in the same swamp or lake they put her body, likely with the body in the back seat. Just close the windows. They found a car this year in Oklahoma I think, decades after the people went missing and the bodies were still in the car. The murderer didn't want to use their own car because the blood was probably already seeping through the blanket and they knew they couldn't have that in their car and they probably didn't have any plastic bags to wrap it better with. So they were forced to use her car. One person disposed of the body and they needed her car to get back to Scarborough where their own car was. If two people went, one could drive her car while the other drove another car. Put the body in the Tercel, roll up the windows and push it into the water car and all. Hop into the other car and back to Scarborough and there wouldn't be any evidence.

Even though DNA was in it's infancy, few outside of LE would have a great deal of understanding of it. People had been convicted based on DNA evidence as early as 1987 in Florida and admissible as evidence in Canada since 1988 . I know they published the fingerprint (two sets were never identified) info but surely LE would have checked for fibers or hairs? Moving a body in and out of a car and driving the car there has to be something left behind or was that completely botched as well?

One thing I always found strange was that RB's fingerprints were never found in the car. It could simply mean that he never was in her car in all the time they were together. That does sound unlikely. He does admit to even the night before taking blankets from her car. Surely he touched the car at some point. His prints being FOUND there would have been more likely and would have proven nothing anyways since he could say "Of course I was in her car. I was her boyfriend after all." What part of the car were the fingerprints found on?

 

[SecretSource]

I always have wondered if the police ever searched the little park beside 3r? I'm not 100% convinced that the murder didn't happen in the parking lot of UofT, but I have always thought the park beside 3r was another possibility where it happened. Whether the body was immediately put into her car or left in the park across from 3r and moved to her car later that night of the 19th is a possibility.

It is frustrating not knowing how much credence we can put in Collins' sighting of the car at Three 'R'; on the surface, it sounds credible and corroborates the final resting place of the car but as we know these cases often drag out the moronic and the marginalized as witnesses - MP being an example - so it's hard to know who's telling the truth and who's making a play for attention. According to the CFS experts who spoke to LE on November 22, 1990 and whose information remained hidden for 23 years, a Tuesday killing meant regardless of where the killing took place EB had to be placed in her likely by 9:30 PM assuming that if she could have attended her class she would have - per the newly disclosed CFS report - which would mean anywhere from broad daylight on the second longest day of the year or just as the darkness had set in at 9:30 PM.

But the timeline is why the "RB as killer" doesn't work. If he killed her before 7:00 PM that would mean a killing in broad daylight in an area he was known to frequent; however, even if he had managed to do such a thing without being seen what advantage would there have been to him hiding the body and returning later, especially when he went to the weightroom and the classroom and didn't bother making himself seen there then went to alert EB's mother? I pause here to note that even LE didn't believe that RB went to UTSC to create an alibi at first - they didn't even believe he had been there - but even once they could verify that he was there they still had to deal with the fact that he didn't recognize anyone there and that he hid himself at EB's class; indeed, it was only blind luck that he was seen at both venues. If he were trying to create an alibi he would have simply made a beeline for the gym and played volleyball with the 10 plus people who knew him and could vouch for him being there. So, without a reason to be at UTSC why not get rid of the body and get his butt home ESPECIALLY after telling EB's mother that her daughter was missing which meant that as far as RB knew EB's mother could have called him anytime that night! In fact, if RB killed EB that night he would have known that EB's mother would almost certainly have called him that night, which is likely why the police needed a Friday morning sighting - a Tuesday night/Wednesday morning drive to get rid of the body would have been insane for RB and the police knew that. As it happens, the recently disclosed blood evidence makes a Tuesday night killing and a Thursday night/Friday morning drive to get rid of the body a no go.

But I would bet that the body was wrapped in a blanket, and probably one from her car. I don't think anybody would want to risk using a blanket of their own, just in case the body was found. A blanket soaking up a lot of the blood would probably account for the minimal blood found in the back of her car. What was found was just what soaked through the blanket. You wouldn't drive with a body in the back and not covered. It's a small car and easy to see down into from a passing truck and there are a lot of gravel pits around if transported north as expected plus a lot of road work at night and therefore trucks on the road.

The blankets from EB's car were retrieved at the time of her disappearance. In 2007, these two blankets were tested by the CFS at the request of RB's lawyers and they showed absolutely no blood whatsoever; however, the CFS did find traces of RB's semen, consistent with his statement that he and EB had used the blankets as recently as two days before to lay upon while making love. Interestingly, this CFS report was obtained by the CBC and RB was asked about it; it turns out that his lawyers hadn't even told him about the test because the Crown for obvious reasons didn't want it entered into evidence. One would have thought that if EB's body had been hidden in the valley - or anywhere else - for several hours that RB would have taken steps to prevent any blood from getting in the car; the fact that he knew of the blankets and didn't use them suggests that whoever did conceal the body wasn't concerned with concealing the blood - only their involvement. Lastly, the amended Statement of Claim that details the new allegations relating to LE's failure to disclose the CFS report of November 22, 1992 - which is now public record for anyone who wishes to read it - includes a copy of the original foolscap note that LE made in summarizing the conversation he had with the two CFS experts. It contains the following passage:

- if body placed in car 2.5 days after death – not wrapped


I think that even if LE and the Crown ever believed the body was wrapped, IMO they likely don't now.

Would one of the mystery callers match up with the unidentified fingerprints found in the car?

Could be, but as of right now the source of the uneliminated fingerprints remains a mystery. They are not Bernardo's.

 

[SecretSource]

One thing I always found strange was that RB's fingerprints were never found in the car. It could simply mean that he never was in her car in all the time they were together. That does sound unlikely. He does admit to even the night before taking blankets from her car. Surely he touched the car at some point. His prints being FOUND there would have been more likely and would have proven nothing anyways since he could say "Of course I was in her car. I was her boyfriend after all." What part of the car were the fingerprints found on?

One fingerprint was found on the inside passenger's side window; I'm not sure about the others. Also, he never said they he took the blankets from EB's car, only that they took the blankets from her car.

RB couldn't drive a standard transmission so he would have had no need to drive EB's car; a little known fact is that LE spend a massive amount of time trying to find anyone who had ever seen RB drive a standard - they tracked every employer he'd ever had - and they only found one person: the same person that RB had told them about voluntarily and who had told the police that RB was terrible and that he wouldn't let him try again. More importantly, RB had his own car and had no reason to be in EB's car; he freely admitted that he was passenger in EB's car the week before because they took a client of EB's to a picnic at Bluffer's Park the previous Tuesday and, as RB was not an employee of the group home, he lacked the liability insurance needed so they had to take EB's car.

The presence of uneliminated fingerprints actually helps RB; had he wiped the car to eliminate his fingerprints there likely wouldn't have been uneliminated fingerprints at all and it is unlikely he would have been able to get rid of all of his had they ever been there; IMO the more logical conclusion is that there weren't any of his fingerprints because he was hardly ever in the car and never drove it that night or any other night. In particular, it's very pretty unlikely that RB would have been able to get that car up that hill being someone who couldn't drive a standard; if MV is correct and LE is correct about a pre-7:00 PM killing - and RB is guilty - then he is the only person who would have been driving that car up that hill. Might explain why LE spent so much time on the standard transmission issue; not only did RB have to get the car up the hill, but he would have been driving a car he'd never driven before, with the type of transmission he wasn't familiar with, for anywhere from 2-3 hours at times within a five minute radius of the victim's home in daylight and, on the theory that DD saw the car on Friday morning, two days after EB is reported missing with every cop in the province looking for it. Doesn't add up, IMO.

 

[Snively]

How do you get this thing to use only part of the quote? lol

I still question the time when RB left the Bains around 9:15 pm to the time he made the phone call to Liz's friend. He said he waited a little longer to make the call to her friend to give her time to get home. Was it actually because he wasn't at the campus until after 9:30 pm or whenever he made the call to her friend. Sure sounds like he didn't call until after 9:30 pm but until the phone record is or was checked we won't know. That 15 minutes does make a difference. It is not a long drive from the Bains to the park at UofT and only a 4 minute drive to 3r Collision. Did RB know about 3r and the park beside it being a bit of a renowned make out spot? Did he drive by there on his way back to the campus? It's not much of a detour. A body left in the woods in the park across from 3r could just as easily be moved after 10:30 pm on his way home. The same could be done if the murder happened at the park at UofT.

MV did say she saw a blanket on the seat of Liz's car. Two blankets were accounted for in the trunk. What became of the one on the seat? It was never accounted for that I recall.

"if body placed in car 2.5 days after death – not wrapped"

IF is the big word here (sorry, I couldn't figure out the partial quote thing). This note is a reference to the police theory of the body being moved 2 days later. That was an asinine theory. For so many reasons (maggots or lack of, not the least) it seems she was moved the night of the 19th. If the body was moved on the 19th and wrapped in the unaccounted for blanket it would soak up a lot of the blood.

What's driving me nuts is that I only want to know about two phone calls. The one on the 12th to the Bain residence and the time RB called Liz's friend between him leaving the Bain's and being seen again in the gym.

That 15-30 minute time period between 9:15 pm and call it roughly 9:30 pm to 9:45 pm is a window of opportunity. The darkness obviously would help someone moving a body. I still feel that RB was involved but somebody else was involved as well, almost certainly the person that Liz was meeting that night. It's far easier for two people to move a body. Find me that time of the call RB made to Liz's friend. If it's before 9:30 pm I'll concede the time for RB doesn't fit. But 9:35 pm and slightly later still opens up a 15 - 20 minute window and a crack on the head near her car whether at 3r or the park at UofT, and the body wrapped in the blanket from her seat and dragged into the back of her car or dragged into the woods (and there are woods in both parks) to be moved later and back to gym can be done in 18 minutes including changing from shorts and a t-shirt into jeans and a sweater.

4 minutes - Bain residence to 3r Collision
2 minutes - 3r Collision to UofT Scarborough Campus
9 -12 minutes - thump on the head, drag a body as little as a few meters up to 25 meters, change from shorts and a t-shirt to jeans, park your car and head into the campus

5 minutes - Bain residence to park at UofT
3 minutes - park at UofT to UofT Scarborough Campus
7 - 10 minutes - thump on the head, drag a body as little as a few meters up to 25 meters, change from shorts and a t-shirt to jeans, park your car and head into the campus

The time can be done. I've tried it myself and I'm in terrible shape. lol Younger and in good shape it's easily achievable.

There would be no big rush to come back an hour later at 10:30 pm and move the body from the park to her car. An unattended car between 9:30 pm and 10:30 pm at either 3r or the park by the UofT wouldn't stand out.

Does anybody happen to know the distance from RB's to 3r and also to the park at UofT and to the campus?

The park by 3r is definitely a better fit no matter who did the killing based on the fact with her car being found across from 3r it seems likely the killer left his or her car at 3r in the same little lot across from the office while they drove Liz's car with the body away. Easier obviously if her car was left at 3r to start rather than the park by the UofT although that still is only a 15 minute walk.

One more possibility is what if a jealous girlfriend was involved? I've never heard anything to even suggest it, but it wouldn't be out of the realm.

 

[Snively]

Still strange that he was in the car yet his fingerprints didn't show up. Doesn't mean anything, just strange. Even sitting in the passenger seat he would have to touch the handle on the door to get out. Except for the two sets that were never determined, any one of the Bain's, her friends or RB's prints could have been in the car. Just the two sets that were never determined matter and unless we have a list of every person who was fingerprinted it could be as simple as someone she worked with who helped her carry something to her car or just got something out of her car for her. She was 22 years old with her own car. I'm sure she had a few people in there with her. lol

Yeah, I agree with DD's report being bogus or a word that begins with b and ends in s. I do think the guy at Haugen's is correct and his original time (before the police tried to get him to change it to Friday) of seeing her car in his lot the morning of the 20th between 5:30 am and 6:30 am is accurate. I've talked to the guy enough times. He's a straight up guy. Great BBQ too!

I know a great deal was made over whether RB could or couldn't drive a standard transmission, but this is a shitbox Tercel and not a tractor trailer with 18 speeds. If you're scared enough even the most inept can drive one. Even not scared it's not that hard. First or second gear those things will pull away from a dead stop.

 

[eyesonly]

How do you get this thing to use only part of the quote? lol

I still question the time when RB left the Bains around 9:15 pm to the time he made the phone call to Liz's friend. He said he waited a little longer to make the call to her friend to give her time to get home. Was it actually because he wasn't at the campus until after 9:30 pm or whenever he made the call to her friend. Sure sounds like he didn't call until after 9:30 pm but until the phone record is or was checked we won't know. That 15 minutes does make a difference. It is not a long drive from the Bains to the park at UofT and only a 4 minute drive to 3r Collision. Did RB know about 3r and the park beside it being a bit of a renowned make out spot? Did he drive by there on his way back to the campus? It's not much of a detour. A body left in the woods in the park across from 3r could just as easily be moved after 10:30 pm on his way home. The same could be done if the murder happened at the park at UofT.

MV did say she saw a blanket on the seat of Liz's car. Two blankets were accounted for in the trunk. What became of the one on the seat? It was never accounted for that I recall.

What's driving me nuts is that I only want to know about two phone calls. The one on the 12th to the Bain residence and the time RB called Liz's friend between him leaving the Bain's and being seen again in the gym..

snively, MV"s description is that of a blue "cloth" on the drivers seat, not a blanket. been over this before, it was not a blanket. A cloth denotes something that could never be big enough to cover a body.

as for your theory of RB killing EB between the time he left the bains house at 915pm to the time he called the girl from the UofT phone. that really makes no sense because what you would be talking about is a premeditated thought on RB;s side that he was looking for her that night to simply kill her. as soon as he found her he immediately killed her.
this was not a premeditated occurrance. RB didn't know she was seeing someone else, and we still don't have proof of that. If he caught her with someone then that someone would have identified RB that night.
EB herself states in her diary that RB gets down on himself, and goes inward. Never any outward anger or violent tendencies. If he had run into her he would have asked what was up, she would have lied and that would have been it for the night.
absolutely no reason for him to kill her out of the blue.
we know more about EB's actions now, but no one knew back then. RB had no idea she may have been actually seeing someone.

afterwards and reading her diary i'm sure RB felt like he was put in some bizzaro world finding out the girl he was in love with may not have been whom he thought she was.


fingerprints;
book says EB's youngest brother PB print on the rearview mirror. 3 sets of prints on passenger window, inside i believe. good probability they all belong to EB as they don't have EB;s prints. ( wondering why they didn't print her room for comparison, wouldn't be admissable, but would have cleared that up).
5 sets prints were known, 1 was PB;s as stated above.
wondering if the other 4 were ever made public and who's they were. wondering why DF didn't put them in the book, or were they all PB's. were they all different sets.

as for RB's prints not in the car, that to me goes to his innocence, because how could he or anyone wipe exactly their own prints off and leave the others. if he wiped the rearview mirror he would have wiped all the prints off.
there are lots of textures in the car i believe you can't get prints off of.

you believe RB is guilty based on the fact that the police said he was and he was convicted. therefore it's not if he did it but when he did it.
with all the info coming out about what LE actually did in this case, you should give RB the benefit of the doubt, and go back and start this from the beginning with him be innocent and then looking at all the information and you will see it in a different light.

We are not helping EB at all if we continue down a road that doesn't exist. with all due respect and imo

 

[Woodland]

You are absolutely correct that there is nothing in the blood to prove that EB was dead on June 19th, 1990 ...

From post #655 - when you say 'nothing in the blood' does that mean other tests were performed or that no other tests were ever performed?


You are correct in post #660 that CFS saw themselves as working for the Crown - a conclusion from the Kaufman Report released April 1998. I agree CFS would have tried very hard to find whatever LE was looking for - but were they competent enough to do so? Botch one autopsy and many other tests for one case, including losing most of the evidence, then you are likely to botch many. Jmo.