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

[eyesonly]

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.

doesn't really mean anything,
but a bit confused as to what the accident has to do with reversing the car in or not. clearly it was forward in, just curious as to the relation between the accident and not reversing it in.

the accident seems to be new news for us here. was everyone aware of it at that time. and how did RB find out about the accident to tell LE.
EB's car being the only one in the lot at 645pm as per RB, does put MV's sighting into quesiton. if she got there at about 620pm that would mean she went for a walk with mom and dog and gone by 645pm. doesn't seem like a very long walk, almost not worth going there.

also depending on what direction she came from, she couldn't access the valley lot coming from the military trail side at 620pm as per the accident.
maybe she saw it on another day. would be great to read her full statement.

i'm very interested in this accident. there was another wtiness sighting of EB about 630pm east of the valley, but she was alone without a car.
and got into someone elses car. as per this witness who is very emphatic on what he saw and the date he saw it, and LE had no interest in it but he did give a statement.

secretsource;
i notice you have been trying to eliminate witness sightings ( and doing and excellent job i must say ) because of how LE has put them towards RB's guilt and that's understandable.
however, i believe as you said these sighting originally helped RB until LE got their claws into the witnesses to change or elaborate their sightings to make it look bad for RB

Maybe MP is nuts and was lookng for attention, but maybe she did see EB and at 545pm. we would have no idea why eb had her car in the lot and walked over to the tennis courts. maybe walking with someone. but her sighting if plausible is only that she saw eb, nothting to do with RB. we know she didn't see RB and LE led her along the path to that conclusion that he was there.
MP went for water break at aprox 545pm and then an hour later at 645pm. it's possible she saw EB at 545pm, and only because she was at the water fountain, the other instructors were on the court and had no reason to be looking around outside the court. the three asian girls were there at 645pm and they didn't see EB because it was at 545pm ( if we take any credence at all in MP's sighting)
RB i believe drove down to the court area, and walked down the stairs or at least to the stairs to check out the court area at about the time MP took her second water break. it is possible she caught a glimpse of RB at that time.
two different sighting two different times but was so trying to help LE out, and they probably got her so confused in their questioning and methods that she combined the two sightings which had an element of truth in each one, but together became a tool to convict RB with.

Maybe MV did see the cigs at 620pm which could be very important, but yet has no bearing on RB not seeing them at 645pm. what that means is someone came to the car between 620pm and 645pm and retrieved them or put them in the glove compartment.
Maybe MV did see the fingers as well which means they, unless she reversed in, were on the passenger side (at least one set). and when RB noticed them both on the drivers side at the 3R, that could be an important cooberation that someone moved one from the passenger side to the drivers side, maybe it got knocked off when putting EB in the back seat on the floor, he threw it in the car and later put in on the drivers side because he forgot which side it was one.

all jmo

 

[Woodland]

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.

From post #661 - very much have to disagree here. Compare a wallet found in the home of a married woman that is missing along with her car, a married woman that is having problems in her marriage. The number one suspect is the person in the home that said married woman is having problems with. The car is often found, often the woman is not.

EB always had, and was having problems in her home as expressed in her diary pages many times. Both she and her car went missing, car is found and wallet is in her room.

Not a casual occurrence imo, in light of Mrs B claiming EB planned to make 4 separate trips to the campus that day. Imo, that is strange. Where was her purse? All the focus was on the campus, it seemed, with RB's chance sighting of the car, however Mrs B putting so much emphasis on the campus has me wondering if LE took that into consideration as well. LE and the family refused to let go of the crime at the campus theory.

 

[Woodland]

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,

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?"

That is a bombshell revelation imo. Huge implications. Do you have any back-up for that? Not doubting it, just think it should have some verification here.

Did any member of the Bain family know MV prior to her coming forward?

 

[eyesonly]

That is a bombshell revelation imo. Huge implications. Do you have any back-up for that? Not doubting it, just think it should have some verification here.

Did any member of the Bain family know MV prior to her coming forward?

i really have no idea if they knew MV or not but just like the 401 witness whom they never met, when anyone called the number on the missing person flyer done by the bains, it was the bains home number on the flyer. So they got the initial contact and sent them on to LE.
however when the 401 witness called and went to their house, they asked him if he wanted to see RB to see if he was the driver he saw, as RB was downstairs when the witness got to their house.
he said no, he didn't want to be influenced by anything, and they connected him to LE to give his statement.
so i agree with secretsource that mr bain talked to her first then sent her to LE as done with the 401 witness, and how many other witnesses we may never know

so it's likely MV did the same thing. and it's possible that she related what she saw to whomever she talked to, most likely mr. bain. and very possible he asked questions back like " oh did you see the fingers on the car " so as to implant a thought, which may not have been on purpose at that time, because if i were the dad and people were calling me with sightings i would be asking the same thing, did you see this, did you notice that.

and there is a logical explanation why RB didn't see the cigs as i stated above, that someone came to the car between MV and RB's sighting of the car which was aprox a 25 min span and took them or put them in the glove compartment

 

[Woodland]

I believe it's likely MV came forward to the Bain family first as everyone did. Wouldn't mind a researched verification if it's possible though. Had no idea she went to the Bain family first.

Why would someone open the door of a car that didn't belong to them, pick up a pack of smokes from the passenger seat and put them in the glove compartment? Why not take them along with something else they found worth opening the door for? Why not throw them on the ground if they were against the habit? Or could EB have been the person that moved the pack of smokes?

 

[eyesonly]

I believe it's likely MV came forward to the Bain family first as everyone did. Wouldn't mind a researched verification if it's possible though. Had no idea she went to the Bain family first.

Why would someone open the door of a car that didn't belong to them, pick up a pack of smokes from the passenger seat and put them in the glove compartment? Why not take them along with something else they found worth opening the door for? Why not throw them on the ground if they were against the habit? Or could EB have been the person that moved the pack of smokes?

well, i'm trying to say it may have either been EB or the person she was meeting ( if there was a person ). should have clarified myself. definitely not a stranger because the cigs were located in the glove compartment.

and as for MV, would be good to know if she stated anything about the accident secretsource touched on. if she did in her statement then that would mean she was there at that time. unless she came from the other way and couldn't see or notice the accident, maybe it was up closer to military trail.

hopefully secretsource will enlighten us more today on the accident. and how the info on the accident came to RB, because he didn't arrive in the area till 15 mins after it was cleared as per secretsource.

 

[Snively]

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.

I am looking at in very simple terms. So much has to be sorted with witness sighting as to what was accurate and what wasn't. I'm trying to stick with the few undisputed facts. I'm also looking at it in one of the most basic reasons of murder: jealousy.

9:15 pm - 9:20 pm : Both RB and Mrs. Bain say RB was at the Bains
The next fact I need before I can exclude RB is that phone call to Liz's friend that RB made from the campus. Seems pretty certain it was after 9:30 pm but I won't ink it in yet. Like I said if it is 9:30 pm to 9:35 pm I'd be willing to exclude RB entirely. Any time after 9:35 pm still opens up a window. I bet the record of that phone call is in the police files, unless they totally blew it. If it isn't in there because they didn't bother, I'll concede his innocence. That would leave no hard facts for a window.

The jealousy angle is real as is his obsessiveness. Her diary talks about RB as a clingy type character. People with no knowledge of this case have read some of the diary entries and feel the same way. "She was a bit looney and he's clingy and annoying her." That's one way somebody put it to me. I don't think that is too hard to see. Copy those diary entries and hand it to anybody you know and see what they think. By his own admission he drove through the park on his way to the gym looking for her. He went and hung around outside her class. He drove back on the way to the Bain's looking for her. All the while knowing she had told him that she was going for dinner with a friend. That's just one night! At one point don't you just put it down to her blowing off class and going out for dinner with her friend and hanging out with her for the night? Why did he go down to the parking lot by the UofT looking for her on his way to the gym if he thought she was out for dinner? That wouldn't be his typical drive to the campus. How many other nights did he do the same thing? You can't tell me this was a one time thing. There were witnesses she worked with who testified to this. He knew about her ex-boyfriend and you can't tell me he didn't suspect there was a lot more going on than just talking on the phone.

I don't think it was premeditated at all. I think it was simply a case of on the way back from the Bain's to the campus he finally found her. Whether she was with someone or alone something happened and 15 - 18 minutes is all it would take. I welcome anybody to go and try the 15 -18 minute run and I'll be willing to help you out timing it or reenacting it if you like.

I don't think any of this is a wild line of reasoning at all and with one simple hard fact it could be disproved. Just get the time of that call from the campus. If it doesn't exist and the police blew it then RB is free and clear.

As for the blanket I still have seen it called "a rust and blue coloured blanket on the passenger seat". Unless it was a face cloth, even a pillow slip would be big enough to slip over a persons head and cover the top half of a body. Forensics said the blood found was consistent in location of a body being put on the floor in the back and draped over the transmission tunnel. The passenger seat was found lying flat or at least reclined fully when the car was found. Put a body in the back (especially someone of Liz's small stature), recline the seat and not much more than the chest up will stick out over the transmission tunnel and behind the drivers seat. At night, with even a pillow case over the chest and head part, a passing glance from a trucker would reveal very little. Get a small enough person of equivalent size and try it. Hard to find a Tercel now, but a similar car of the size will prove it can be done. I've tested that too with a Hyundai Accent (it was as close in size as I could find) and a person who was 5'4" and 112 lbs. I think that was slightly bigger than Liz actually. It works and I've looked from the height of a dump truck driver's seat during daytime and not much could be made out that would alarm anyone.

 

[Woodland]

By his own admission he drove through the park on his way to the gym looking for her.

I don't think it was premeditated at all. I think it was simply a case of on the way back from the Bain's to the campus he finally found her.

RB makes no claim he drove through the park on his way to the gym looking for her. Anywhere. So not going to ask that you provide back-up.

You contradict yourself in that RB finally found her after leaving the Bain residence after 9:15 pm - you said earlier he drove straight to where she was - immediately within 2 minutes or so.

The question would be what exactly was EB doing waiting around in one of two parks until 9:30 pm or so instead of attending her class? Really hoping for a non-response.

 

[Snively]

RB makes no claim he drove through the park on his way to the gym looking for her. Anywhere. So not going to ask that you provide back-up.

You contradict yourself in that RB finally found her after leaving the Bain residence after 9:15 pm - you said earlier he drove straight to where she was - immediately within 2 minutes or so.

The question would be what exactly was EB doing waiting around in one of two parks until 9:30 pm or so instead of attending her class? Really hoping for a non-response.

He did say he went through the park again on the way to the Bain's and did not see her car.

I don't contradict myself at all. If he drives from the Bain's to 3r to look around it's a 4 minute drive. If he drove by the park at UofT it's a 5 minute drive. He was looking for her. Of that there is no doubt! Two options to locations her car was placed at that night. There's no evidence he saw her car at 3r but he did see it at the park at UofT. 3r area with the little park beside it was known as a make out spot. Did RB know about that spot? Seems Liz did if the 8:00 pm sighting at 3r is correct. Did they go there together anytime themselves over the time they were seeing each other? Sure seems possible, doesn't it? A drive by either area on his way back to the gym on just a chance he sees her and he finally does. Feel free to do the drive yourself or even just punch it in to Google maps and see what times you come up. Lighter traffic after 9:15 pm makes it real easy for those times. The drive times are cold, hard facts to two locations where her car was both seen and ultimately found. Both are within a 5 minute drive of a location where RB was confirmed to have been and within a 3 minute drive of where he ended up. There is no speculation to these times, just tried and proven facts.

Seems fairly logical that she had either been with someone or was with someone and in the case with 3r there is a witness who places her there with someone. Now there's a reason she was at either of these parks. Did you never blow off a class and go hang out with friends or somebody you were seeing or were real interested in seeing? If you didn't you may be the only person in the history of the world.

 

[eyesonly]

Agree with woodland 100000000%.

RB has never once said he drove through the park on his way to the gym looking for her.
The first time at 645pm he was on his natural way from his house to the gym. He noticed her car there, and if as ss says, it was the only car in the lot, it would stand out to him as he drove by. That caught his attention because it was so close to her class time.
Any boyfriend would have stopped and checked it out.

The next time he drove through the valley area was after her class after 9pm and before he got to the bain house at 915pm.

Snively you have yet to show any proof other than specualtion that he went to the valley after the bains and not back to the gym as RB has
always stated.

When you say things like " by his own admission ", you really need to be able to back that up.
it's one thing to speculate with your own opinion, but quite another to say RB has admitted to something he really hasn't

 

[eyesonly]

He did say he went through the park again on the way to the Bain's and did not see her car.

but your other statement said he drove through the park on his way to the gym looking for her. this statement is absolutely false snively.
what you say has a big impact on what you are trying to prove.
he drove through the park on his way to the bains place. if he drove through the park on the way to the gym that means after the bains. very big difference.

and as i stated above, his 645pm drive through the park was not looking for her. he was on his way to the gym. saw her car and then looked for her.
there was no intention of looking for her when he was on his way to the gym the first time. it just turned out that way because of seeing her car where it was.

your statement leads someone to believe you are talking about a time when he drove through the park with specific intentions of looking for her and then went to the gym.
this sequence never happened

 

[Woodland]

Chuckles - funny enough Snively, I think you know exactly what happened the night of 19 June 1990 with regards the EB. You just ain't telling us. Jmo.

 

[eyesonly]

Seems fairly logical that she had either been with someone or was with someone and in the case with 3r there is a witness who places her there with someone. Now there's a reason she was at either of these parks. Did you never blow off a class and go hang out with friends or somebody you were seeing or were real interested in seeing? If you didn't you may be the only person in the history of the world.

snively, you are taking the 3r witness in conjunction with it being the possibility of RB there with her. if you mention the 3r witness with any credibility then you have to exonerate RB because he was absolutely known to be in the gym at that time working out, and thus is why the cops had EB killed before 7pm and why they dropped the 3r witness from their side of the equation because they knew RB had a solid alibi for that time.
and that's why they never disclosed the 401 witness to anyone because it would have cooberated the 3r witness and their case would have been sunk right there.

and if you want to speculate on times and what RB might have had the time to do here and there, in your own opinion that's cool, that's what we are here for,
but when you make a statement that RB by his own admission did something, you have to have proof that that happened or was stated somewhere in factual form that we can look up or read.

 

[Snively]

Chuckles - funny enough Snively, I think you know exactly what happened the night of 19 June 1990 with regards the EB. You just ain't telling us. Jmo.

I won't even waste time responding to this.

I have admitted many times it's speculation that he drove back past either park on the way back to the gym. There is no proof that RB did not either. It does a leave a window. See if anybody can dig up that time of the phone call to EB's friend.

Yes if the 3r witness was correct it places only Liz at 3r with someone else. Doesn't mean that RB didn't discover them together if he drove back past either park on the way to the gym.

 

[Woodland]

Thankfully you did respond - so you don't know anything about the night of 19 June 1990 with regard to EB? Certainly accepted by me if you say so.

Can't believe the exact time of the phone call you refer to exonerates or spells the guilt of RB. Unless you know something we don't?

 

[Snively]

Sorry Woodland, I can't remember if you were looking under the driveway or for the ATM.

 

[Woodland]

Chuckles - here is what passed as a psych evaluation of RB shortly after his conviction. Page 437 - 438 NCTM.

It's signed by Jean Folsom, Psychologist, Millhaven Institution
The name almost denotes .... well, something.

'The scores on the clinical scales of Baltovich's tests were all quite low and most were below average. Therefore, they did not indicate any psychological disturbance. There is no indication of a serious mood or thinking disorder. He does not experience anger more frequently nor more intensely than normal but he does use a lot of energy to monitor and control the expression of what anger that he does feel. This could ultimately lead to emotional outbursts.'

There are no clinical type words used so seems any functioning person can interpret this.

My interpretation is, RB was 'normal' by the test standard. Yet, because of his conviction, Folsom (Prison Blues?) felt is necessary to put a spin on RB's normal after comparing him to rest of the normal population.

The rest of the normal population tends to have many emotional outbursts? Is this what JF is saying? RB has fewer outbursts, so he is likely to commit murder in an emotional situation?

Garbage, imo.

 

[SecretSource]

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.

 

[SecretSource]

Thankfully you did respond - so you don't know anything about the night of 19 June 1990 with regard to EB? Certainly accepted by me if you say so.

Can't believe the exact time of the phone call you refer to exonerates or spells the guilt of RB. Unless you know something we don't?

The call was made at roughly 10:00 PM as per LP's testimony and another person who witnessed the phone calland who spoke to the police. Multiple witnesses either gave statements or testified that RB was accounted for between 9:15 - 10:30 PM that night and once MS was found the police never questioned RB's whereabouts from 7:00 PM onward that night until he left UTSC at 10:30 PM. NT saw RB at the class between 9:00 and 9:15 PM, EB's mom saw RB and spoke to him when it was still daylight so it had to be no later than 9:30 PM and RC, JC, AC, NW, RG and SD all saw RB at the UTSC gym once he returned after speaking to EB's mother; RB also spoke to two UTSC Athletic Centre employees - one of whom, RT, he asked for a phone book to call LP - and RT gave a statement to LE confirming this. If all these witnesses are wrong then RB could have returned to the valley after 9:15 PM but why not wait until darkness if it was only a matter of 15-20 minutes? As it happens, the recently released CFS report indicates that EB had to be in the car within three hours of being killed AND out of the car very soon afterward in order to explain the absence of decompositional smell and fluid and the blood which was fresh and red, as opposed to the dark, decomposed blood that it would have had to be had EB been out of the car and decomposing for a significant time before being put in. In additional, what conceivable reason could RB have had to report EB missing to her mother before placing the body in the car? And, more importantly, why then return to UTSC instead of getting the body disposed of altogether before the alarm bells really started going off?

If you believe that the phone call was made to make it appear that RB was making a boa fide attempt to locate his girlfriend despite being the killer that's one thing; as for the timing and any alleged window of opportunity, I think it is one of many red herrings.

 

[SecretSource]

See if anybody can dig up that time of the phone call to EB's friend.

It was made at roughly 10:00 PM as per my answer below.

Also, she wasn't EB's friend; LP was RB's friend as was her brother who RB played volleyball with.