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

[Woodland]

There was a police and civilian search Saturday - that is when MP came forward on her lunch hour.

There was a police only search on Sunday.

Both as per article and the book.

 

[eyesonly]

There remains no evidence absent Warr's claims - if he actually made them - that the search plans were made prior to the car being found; no documentation, no supplementary reports, nothing. DF was doing his best with what he had but I can assure you much more evidence has emerged subsequent to the publication of the book - and a new updated version of NCTM is being issued soon - and it was only when the police changed their theory to the "the body moved Friday" theory that they suddenly needed RB to know before Friday that the search was going to take place - that way he would have had a reason to move the body after leaving it in the valley for two days. There may be some evidence out there that shows that the Saturday search was organized prior to the car being found, but if it does exist it has never been entered into evidence and neither Warr nor any other witness claimed such a thing under oath. No Claim is a GREAT book but DF didn't get his hands on a LOT of evidence until well after it was published. He did the best that he could.

Secretsource: Any idea on how soon the updated version of NCTM will be. And do you have any idea why RB was called for an interview with det warr before the car was found. Do you think that was just protocol because it was on the 3rd day of Liz missing.
Was there anyone else interviewed like that before the car was found or did LE already have their eyes on RB.

 

[Woodland]

The search was protocol - after 3 days of not finding a missing person, phase three was to organize and conduct a search.

Warr wanted to speak to RB and have RB go over everything he did on the 19th, again, before he organized the search. The meeting between Warr and RB was at 1:30 pm for fifty minutes according to page 109.

The car was found about 2:00 pm and Warr was the first detective on site as soon as he could get there - not the first officer though. Warr told the Bains not to tell RB about finding the car, but RB left the police station and went to the Bains - and heard about the car.

So after just meeting at the station, both Warr and RB found themselves together again at the auto body shop where the car was found.

 

[eyesonly]

Warr told MB not to tell RB about the car when he was going back to get the spare car key he had in his room, (aweful convenient).
That clearly tells us they were focused on RB before any evidence of any wrongdoing ever came to light. Seems like RB was convicted even before the car was found. They had no intentions of ever investigating any other leads. imo

 

[Woodland]

I always thought it was weird that MB had a set of keys for EB's car in his room. In the house I could see, but not MB's room.

Also thought it was weird MB rushed home work and changed his footwear before going to the car location. Maybe his boots were just muddy?

 

[eyesonly]

I always thought it was weird that MB had a set of keys for EB's car in his room. In the house I could see, but not MB's room.

Also thought it was weird MB rushed home work and changed his footwear before going to the car location. Maybe his boots were just muddy?

hard to tell what anyone of us would do in that situation.
however, he apparently was calling home each day to see if they found the car yet, and when he got the call the car was found, imo, the first instinct would be to ask where it was and head down there immediately.
coming home first and changing my boots seems very odd, or maybe he was making sure the "spare" key was still in his room, or maybe he was putting it there before going to the 3r, so it didn't look odd him already having a spare key on him.
hmmmmmm, wonder if his boots might have been a match for the boot/shoe print on the drivers door like someone used their foot to close the door.

All just speculation and jmo

 

[Woodland]

Finished the preliminary trial section.

The quantity of blood in the back of the Tercel was said to be about one half pint - less than what one person normally donates in one sitting. This was according the Head of Pathology at CFS - Dr Hillsdon-Smith. The book is hard enough to read - could not believe reading the name H-S - the second most disgraced pathologist in the history of Ontario. Surely he was able to get the estimated quantity correct though.

What is not mentioned is what testing was done on the blood besides DNA to determine it belonged to a female offspring of Mr and Mrs Bain.
Drugs? Specifically sedatives? Could EB have got into the car under her own steam but groggy and unaware?
Would that have been a wise decision by someone?

Fwiw, there is nothing to this point to indicate EB was in fact deceased on 19 June 1990. The matter of the small quantity of blood found still wet under the rear mats on the afternoon of 22 June did not come up in the book under the prelim section.

The prelim also did not seem to cover when RB could have moved the car, walked back to campus and worked out, played sports or waited for EB after class at 9:00 pm. Or why he would do that in the first place - to what gain?

 

[Woodland]

Along with the above, CFS stated at the prelim that there was no test to determine, at that time, if blood came from a living or deceased person.

 

[Woodland]

Mrs Bain's account of Monday 18 June through Wednesday 20 June - using pages 55, 75, 85, 86. A couple of items will be RB's account, which I will note.

Mrs B loaned her car to daughter C on Monday am, so she used daughter Liz's car to go shopping, also in the am. After shopping Mrs B topped up the gas tank and ordered the limestone she wanted for the driveway. No mention of the patio stones.

At 3:00 pm the three Bain women all went to work - Mrs B and C at the hospital, Liz at the care centre. Mrs B and C returned about midnight - Liz was asleep in her room, still in street clothes. C spent the night even though she lived elsewhere.

At 10:00 am Tuesday, sister C saw Liz in her room studying, still in same street clothes she slept in. Mrs B had received her limestone and was raking it in. Soon after, Liz left to go to the campus to check some papers. Mrs B asked her to pick up milk on the way home. Liz returned in 30 minutes with the milk.

Between 1:00 and 2:00 pm Tuesday, Liz left again for a jog. Took her car so Mrs B assumed she went to the park beside the campus. Liz returned within the hour.

At 4:00 pm Mrs B said Liz left to check the tennis schedule at the campus. Liz said she would be home in a couple of hours for dinner. Liz had a class at 7:00 pm at the campus.

Liz did not return for dinner. RB's account - arrived at Bain house about 9:30 pm to ask if Liz was there - brother M's car was in the driveway. RB had seen her car at 6:45 pm in the lot near the park, unlocked and drivers window down. After class ended at 9:00 pm and RB did not see Liz, he checked the lot again about 9:15 pm and the car was gone. Mrs B was raking the limestone and had not seen Liz - she was hoping to finish the limestone project before picking up Mr B at airport the next day about 2:00 pm.

Wednesday at 6:30 am - Mrs B called RB's home looking for Liz. She did not want to disturb him in the middle of the night, implying, but not stating, Mrs B was aware during the night Liz had not come home. RB arrived at the Bain residence about 7:00 am. Brother M had left for work. Brother P was asleep. No mention C had stayed another night. Mr B had left for Florida on 12 June and was still there.

Mrs B had called LE in the meantime. Mrs B made no other calls looking for Liz. RB (his account) began looking for phone numbers on his arrival to make calls, specifically Liz's friend AC - Liz had told RB she was having dinner with AC the night before. Brother M called home - RB got directions to AC's house from him.

RB (his account) picked up AC and returned to Bain residence. LE arrived and called in the report from the house. RB (his account) started making calls to friends - then went with AC to where he had seen Liz's car the night before and the tennis courts at the campus. Mrs B went grocery shopping and picked Mr B up from airport early afternoon. Did not tell Mr B anything until they were in the car on the way home.

According to Mrs B, Liz intended to make 4 separate trips to campus that day.

 

[SecretSource]

There was a police and civilian search Saturday - that is when MP came forward on her lunch hour.

There was a police only search on Sunday.

Both as per article and the book.

This is correct but partly incomplete. MP was spoken to by EB's father and then introduced to Det. Warr at the UTSC that afternoon at which point she provided a statement. NCTM captures the encounter very well, in that she remembered almost nothing save that she thought she saw EB - they knew each other - and that EB was accompanied by a group of Asian females who were likely UTSC students. MP claimed during that first interview that one of the people "could have been a man" and that he might have been white. That was it. What we don't know is what was shared with her by EB's father re RB being a suspect; we know per disclosure for the 2004 appeal (unavailable to Finkle in 1998) that LE had already detailed surveillance of RB within 40 minutes of the car being found the day before; we can surmise that they would likely have shared this information with the Bain family but we don't know for sure. What is known now is that LE told the Bain family well before MP was hypnotized that RB was the person they and the family believed committed the crime.

 

[SecretSource]

There was a police and civilian search Saturday - that is when MP came forward on her lunch hour.

There was a police only search on Sunday.

Both as per article and the book.

Not true. The search on Sunday was also a joint civilian and police search - although not attended as well as the day before. It was a rainy overcast day that Sunday in contrast to the Saturday search which was a sunny and warm day so that might have caused some of the civilians to stay away.

 

[SecretSource]

I haven't received my Copy of No Mercy yet so I feel a little out of the loop but I seriously doubt the Police would have organized a"serious" search of the park when EB had been missing only two days. In at least 99% of the time,when an adult goes missing along WITH their vehicle, there is no foul play involved. Find the vehicle, find the MP. When a vehicle is the normal mode of transportation and it is there, that when you really start to worry. Unless they had some information that isn't obvious to us, I can't see Det. Warr treating this any different than routine "runner" situation.

What the police do and what they say are two different things. If they had the slightest suspicion that RB, one of the family or anyone else, might have done something to EB in the park, they may have said they were going to do a search of the park just to see what kind of a rise it would get.

Possible, but RB himself had already indicated that he had seen the car in the park. Indeed, it is one of many paradoxes in this case in that if RB committed the crime why proceed to place himself at the putative scene of the crime (as per the police theory that EB was killed there) when he had no reason to believe that he had been seen there. Yes, EB's mother told RB and the police that EB indicated she was going to check the tennis schedule (more likely that she was simply going to the tennis courts because that's where her father played tennis and her mother would have known what she meant) but it doesn't explain why RB would have placed himself there if no one had actually seen him.

In effect, by telling both the Bain family and the police that he had seen EB's car in the valley and by spending the ensuing four hours at UTSC and its environs he was making it known to everyone - including ultimately the police - that he was in the very geographical area that EB (or at least her car) had been on what was likely the last night of her life. Add to this the fact that the original but since discredited theory had EB hidden in the valley for 2-3 days before being disposed of, why on earth would RB deliberately direct everyone's attention to the very area that he had allegedly hidden the body? It would seem likely that anyone committing this type of crime would want to get the heck out of dodge and keep it quiet rather than tell everyone, "Yeah, I was right there beside her car and I thought she might have been hiding from me so I left a note then I removed the note then I went to her class because I thought she might be hiding from me, blah, blah, blah... Why bother doing all this AND sounding the alarm by heading over to speak with EB's mom when, according to the police, you haven't even gotten rid of the body yet?

 

[SecretSource]

Secretsource: Any idea on how soon the updated version of NCTM will be. And do you have any idea why RB was called for an interview with det warr before the car was found. Do you think that was just protocol because it was on the 3rd day of Liz missing.
Was there anyone else interviewed like that before the car was found or did LE already have their eyes on RB.

The updated version will likely be available in early 2015, likely only in e-book form initially but I can't be 100% certain of that. The combination of all the undisclosed evidence that surfaced post-NCTM - the "Dear John" letter that was found in the Crown's files, the proof that RB had gone to the class that night after being accused of making it up, the hidden diary pages, the undisclosed statement Cathy Bain gave in which she claimed that the argument she witnessed was on the Monday night before EB's disappearance (which was impossible because RB was at work that night until 11 PM and could prove it) - all were crying out to be incorporated into a newer, updated version but once the revelations surfaced that there was a secret (as in undisclosed) meeting at the CFS three days after RB's arrest, during which the police were told their theory was a scientific impossibility, it was a done deal; this information is staggering.

Raybould's reason to hide any reference to the CFS meeting for 23 years is pretty obvious: it meant that if EB was killed Tuesday night she had to be in the car and moved within hours of her death - which meant DD either got the day wrong or didn't see the car at all. If DD got the day wrong that would mean that consistent with the woman at Three 'R' Autobody (and Elliott if you believe him) the car never moved after Wednesday morning and RB could not have been driving it early in the morning (and therefore DD's identification was bogus.) If DD did see the car and got the day right, then per the blood and lack of decomposition evidence EB was alive and likely abducted until at least the Thursday, again meaning RB is innocent. Raybould knew the forensic evidence disclosed during that meeting was the death blow to his case, which is why he recorded the details of his meeting on a separate piece of paper and not his memo book. As for why in 1999 he went one step further and removed any reference to the meeting altogether and illegally substituted another page from the following week to throw RB's lawyer's off, that should be perfectly clear as well: by 1999 there was a new suspect in town, and one that just happened to be the SR and who had gone on to abduct and murder two women after leaving Scarborough shortly after RB had been arrested. I suspect that part of DF's motivation is that he was one of the the first journalists to come right out and call BS on the case against RB, call out LE for their shoddy work, and suggest that the infamous Mr. B might have been the real culprit. The events of the last year certainly go a long way in vindicating his initial suspicions.

As for the Warr interview, it might have been caused by several factors. Warr was the man in charge of the missing person's case so maybe as a result of RB's interview the night before on the Thursday night until roughly 1:30 AM (ironically, two and half hours after the police ultimately claimed the car had already been moved from the Three 'R' Autobody shop!) RB may have provided some answers that Warr thought needed clarification. RB also borrowed some diary pages from EB's diary and that might have raised suspicions. Also, Warr was ex-homicide (and one half of the team that had arrested Susan Nelles after which he had left the police in disgrace for five years) so maybe as a former homicide guy he thought, "Hmm, maybe I need to get the boyfriend in here and size him up myself." It may also be that by this time the family had started to point the finger and Warr was simply responding to their suspicions and/or that their suspicions had led him to entertain some of his own.

 

[SecretSource]

Warr told MB not to tell RB about the car when he was going back to get the spare car key he had in his room, (aweful convenient).
That clearly tells us they were focused on RB before any evidence of any wrongdoing ever came to light. Seems like RB was convicted even before the car was found. They had no intentions of ever investigating any other leads. imo

Let the record show that an application to place RB under surveillance was approved within two hours of EB's car being found; it read as follows:

June 22, 1990 - 4:35 PM


“REQUEST FOR VISUAL SURVEILLANCE"

Elizabeth BAIN was reported missing June 20, 1990.
It is believed Elizabeth BAIN was murdered by the Suspect.
SUSPECT: R**** J**** B****
**********
Works at Recreation Centre
University of Toronto (Scarborough Campus)
...

It is believed mobile surveillance would assist
investigators in the location of the body of the
deceased and in the collection of evidence, to
support the arrest of the suspect and the
subsequent charge of murder.”


You better believe they were focused on him; no Perz, no Dibben, nada and THAT my friends in the very definition of "tunnel vision."

 

[SecretSource]

Finished the preliminary trial section.

The quantity of blood in the back of the Tercel was said to be about one half pint - less than what one person normally donates in one sitting. This was according the Head of Pathology at CFS - Dr Hillsdon-Smith. The book is hard enough to read - could not believe reading the name H-S - the second most disgraced pathologist in the history of Ontario. Surely he was able to get the estimated quantity correct though.

What is not mentioned is what testing was done on the blood besides DNA to determine it belonged to a female offspring of Mr and Mrs Bain.
Drugs? Specifically sedatives? Could EB have got into the car under her own steam but groggy and unaware?
Would that have been a wise decision by someone?

Fwiw, there is nothing to this point to indicate EB was in fact deceased on 19 June 1990. The matter of the small quantity of blood found still wet under the rear mats on the afternoon of 22 June did not come up in the book under the prelim section.

The prelim also did not seem to cover when RB could have moved the car, walked back to campus and worked out, played sports or waited for EB after class at 9:00 pm. Or why he would do that in the first place - to what gain?

The test performed is referred to as a "reverse paternity test." From Wikipedia:

Reverse paternity determination is the ability to establish the biological father when the father of a person, or a suspect, is not available. The test uses the STR alleles in mother and her child, other children and brothers of the alleged father and deduction of genetic constitution of the father by the basis of genetic laws to create a rough amalgamation. The advantage of this knowledge is the ability to compare the father's DNA when a direct sample of the father is not available. An episode of Solved (TV series) shows this test used to see if a blood sample matches with the victim of a kidnapping.


EB's sister testified that she never bled in the car; ergo, by process of elimination it must have been EB's because the sample was known to have come from a female offspring of RB and JB (EB's parents).

Good point about Dr. Hillsdon-Smith - his botched autopsy in the GPM wrongful conviction will go down in history. As it happens, he was the pathologist who, along with a blood stain pattern expert Higaki met with LE three days after RB was arrested at which time they collectively and for a variety of reasons told LE that the "body moved on Thursday night/Friday morning" theory was a non-starter. We can only hope the good doctor knew what he was talking about; alas, he can't be questioned as he is talking to the angels now.

You are absolutely correct that there is nothing in the blood to prove that EB was dead on June 19th, 1990; and, as per the recent disclosure of the suppressed CFS report, if DD is correct (I doubt it) and the blood found in the car was fresh and red in colour then EB had to be alive at least two days after 19 June 1990.

 

[SecretSource]

"As it happens, he was the pathologist who, along with a blood stain pattern expert Higaki met with LE three days after RB was arrested at which time they collectively and for a variety of reasons told LE that the "body moved on Thursday night/Friday morning" theory was a non-starter."

Correction: The "body moved on Thursday night/Friday morning" theory was a non-starter if EB had been killed on the Tuesday night; however, if she had been killed days later then this scenario is not inconsistent with the blood evidence and lack of decomposition evidence and might be more consistent. Woodside's comment that there is no definitive proof - forensic or otherwise - that EB was killed on Tuesday, June 19th, 1990 is correct. Now IMHO she was likely killed on June 19th 1990 but the forensic evidence that is now part of the complete public record cannot establish this definitively and therefore it remains a possibility.

 

[Woodland]

Thank-you for the fantastic history lesson SecretSource!

DF was far to kind to not mention the reason behind Warr's 5 year absence. And by 1990 the Chief of Police was McCormack - how many chiefs have two badge toting, teflon wearing sons with as many charges as they had between them?

Since Hillsdon-Smith couldn't recognize a severed breast bone with a piece missing and fractured face when he saw one, should the age of the blood in the back of the Tercel be open for the purpose of sleuthing? Have not read any details on what exactly H-S said yet. I'm asking as he also didn't know what to make of diatoms in the bone(s) of a deceased person with pink teeth - just left it as an open question for investigators and a jury. He was getting paid to know things he clearly did not and could not answer.

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

 

[eyesonly]

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

 

[eyesonly]

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?

 

[SecretSource]

Thank-you for the fantastic history lesson SecretSource!

DF was far too kind indeed to Warr but Warr does not even approach the other homicide detectives - including the two principals - in terms of nastiness. Interesting anecdote: during fresh evidence examinations for RB's appeal in 2004 Warr seemed a little more accommodating to RB's counsel than the latter would have expected - perhaps because Warr was one of the few who had initially thought there was a chance that EB might have been the victim of the SR and subsequent events had lent credence to that suspicion - but as a result of their interaction RB's counsel contacted Warr asking him whether he was willing to concede that RB might truly be innocent. "I won't go that far" was Warr's response but he quickly added that, in his professional opinion, "there was never reasonable and probable grounds to arrest RB" which is quite the concession. Interesting tidbit number #2 re former Chief McCormack: his youngest son and daughter both went to the same high school as RB as the same time.

Knowing absolutely nothing re forensics I can't hazard a guess as to how to measure the aging of blood but I am sure the science has advanced since 1990; however, I would think that between HD or RH - the latter being the actual blood expert as opposed to HD who was the go-to man for decomposition - I think it's safe to say that if they could have offered a precise figure they would have; as it happens, what they did tell Raybould was telling enough in that they fixed the bleeding to no more than three hours after death. HD like many CFS people likely saw himself as 'kinda-sorta' working for the Crown - much like Dr. Charles Smith - so in that sense he would be much more likely than someone at an independent lab to find what the police were looking for. Small wonder that GPM's sample was sent to a lab in the UK.