Canada - Lucas Fowler, Chynna Deese, and Leonard Dyck, all murdered, Alaska Hwy, BC, Jul 2019 #16

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #501
I still think C&L crossed paths with K&B somewhere prior to the murder though...
I also think that has 50% probability, as their routes to Yukon overlapped. They could also have seen the disabled blue van earlier on July 14, and they decided to come back after midnight.
 
  • #502
I haven't yet seen anything definitive regarding what they shot themselves with, just that they shot themselves.

Whether there were 2 guns, or more than two, my theory is they were stolen. Might be stolen from family members, or they could be stolen from elsewhere. My hunch is the latter (I think those two might have been criminals before they ever saw that blue van). I have nothing solid to base it on, though.

I know one MSM article said rifles, but I don't know where it was from, or whether it was accurate.

There is a lot of theft in Port Alberni apparently. But like...the thing that prevents me from thinking they were experienced thieves or whatever before this is that they were awful at getting away with crime. I just can't see them actually succeeding in stealing guns and not getting caught. Unless it was from a family member where it was really easy to access and unlikely the family member would check on it in the next week or so. JMO.
 
  • #503
It's in the press conference that's linked in that post. I'll try to make a link directly to it...

Sorry, I can't get it to work with a timestamp. Best I can do is a direct link to the press conference video. The relevant bit begins at 7:10

Thank you :)

The reporter asked for clarification about shell casings found and the rcmp refused to confirm or deny. Im curious if the reporter was asking based on a rumour or was it a question based from talking with a person who spent time at the crime site?

Shell casing could still refer to a shotgun hull if the person describing it wasn’t aware of differences. But without any input based on fact it’s all just a merry go round of assumptions. Holding out hope that the official report has answers.
 
  • #504
“He was absolutely, completely in love with the buffalo. They’re just so pure,” Erika said.
It is so moving, teary eyed and heartwarming to be reading some of these stories about the victims which are coming out now......about Mr. Dyck, Lucas at the ranch and Chynna. Lives Interrupted - so heartbreaking.
 
  • #505
Call me a huge sap, but I keep thinking about the articles about the victims posted earlier. I would have loved to have known each one of them. What a loss for their friends, famlies, and the world.
 
  • #506
I know one MSM article said rifles, but I don't know where it was from, or whether it was accurate.

There is a lot of theft in Port Alberni apparently. But like...the thing that prevents me from thinking they were experienced thieves or whatever before this is that they were awful at getting away with crime. I just can't see them actually succeeding in stealing guns and not getting caught. Unless it was from a family member where it was really easy to access and unlikely the family member would check on it in the next week or so. JMO.
Or maybe K&B acquired/stole the gun(s) at the beginning of their trip/rampage, on the 12th.
 
  • #507
  • #508
I don't know if victim blaming was the goal of the people who were speculating on that. I think they were just trying to figure out how they might have gotten two guns without anyone noticing.
Exactly. And to suggest that anyone who was open to that possibility was engaging in such, was nothing more than a transparent effort to shut down what was a good-faith discussion.

I’ve said all along that I thought they hit the road armed, but I was respectful of those who believed that they may have gained weapons along the way.

A door is open until it’s not.

That statement seems to have closed it.
 
  • #509
Also maybe subconsciously this was a way to force themselves to commit suicide. Like, they hated their lives, so they decided to do something so terrible that not only could they live with themselves, but they would never have any hope of a good life again. They probably could have gotten away with it, but they made it so obvious that they did it (and when it wasn't particularly obvious in the first one, they made it so with the second). Then they could have turned themselves in, but instead they went so deep into the wilderness that they probably would have had no idea how to get out even if they changed their minds. They put themselves in a situation where suicide was the only good option, and I think that was one reason why. I don't know how much of this was even on a conscious level. Just speculation.

You just explained what is basically the very core of "extensive suicide" . The person contemplates suicide but is unable to plan a way to do it, all by themselves. They decide they will do it after they have killed others. The killing of others can be more appealing and exciting (thereby giving the subject the motivation to carry out the suicide or resulting in being boxed into a corner and killed by police).

They can even gameify it. In fact, we could say that the legends of Butch and Sundance or Bonnie and Clyde or any number of solo serial killers) show how it can work (until it doesn't, and the players are dead; game over).

The article on gaming and psychopathy (linked upthread, but I can find it in my bookmarks) talked about how two different players find themselves in a new game world, with almost nothing.

One player previously has learned to make friends with others in game, in order to further his own goals. The other player thinks it's funny to kill strangers and take whatever stuff they might have.

The first player was shocked, beginning the game with his new teammate, that the other person immediately destroyed the first stranger they met (and laughed about it). First player was irritated, too, because that new person was basically unarmed, but might have been interesting and useful to have along (remember, all these characters are operated by real people out in the real world - not by the computer).

During World War 1, both sides used soccer to gameify aspects of war in the trenches, particularly the British (for whom it was rather successful).

Underlying all that, though, had to be the very real knowledge that they were on their own suicide mission (MOO). That had to become conscious at some point.

As suicide rates in their age group rise in North America (and elsewhere), we can expect more of the extensive type of suicide, in which the suiciding person decides to take others with them.
 
  • #510
Exactly. And to suggest that anyone who was open to that possibility was engaging in such, was nothing more than a transparent effort to shut down what was a good-faith discussion.

I’ve said all along that I thought they hit the road armed, but I was respectful of those who believed that they may have gained weapons along the way.

A door is open until it’s not.

That statement seems to have closed it.

Everything has to be on the table, until it's not. Even if this crime doesn't need "solving" any more, the point of WS is to keep our investigate talents and skills well honed.

I think they hit the road armed, as well. The lead time between leaving home and their first killing is so short, they did not have time to come across cabins with guns hidden or go onto the streets and make contacts to buy guns. The probability of victims having guns is higher than, say, that they randomly stumbled on a cache of guns and ammo left by drug dealers near the road as they traveled on their first day or two.

They could have gotten the guns illegally at home, through contacts.

Heck, they could have made an online contact and used any number of methods to pay for a gun, which they then picked up somewhere in B.C. That would take police a bit of time to work out, but the digital footprint should still be traceable to some extent. I bet these two tried very hard to erase that digital footprint and I bet it's really frustrating to LE.

Now we know that Prof Dyck did not carry guns or approve of them.
 
  • #511
Everything has to be on the table, until it's not. Even if this crime doesn't need "solving" any more, the point of WS is to keep our investigate talents and skills well honed.

I think they hit the road armed, as well. The lead time between leaving home and their first killing is so short, they did not have time to come across cabins with guns hidden or go onto the streets and make contacts to buy guns. The probability of victims having guns is higher than, say, that they randomly stumbled on a cache of guns and ammo left by drug dealers near the road as they traveled on their first day or two.

They could have gotten the guns illegally at home, through contacts.

Heck, they could have made an online contact and used any number of methods to pay for a gun, which they then picked up somewhere in B.C. That would take police a bit of time to work out, but the digital footprint should still be traceable to some extent. I bet these two tried very hard to erase that digital footprint and I bet it's really frustrating to LE.

Now we know that Prof Dyck did not carry guns or approve of them.

BBM
I disagree. We don't start any discussion here with "anything is possible," but rather we start what is most likely true based on the facts we know. One of the things we know is partial life histories of victims.

We don't start with the assumption that Chynna may have provided a gun to the men who murdered her, we start with the men who murdered her had a gun. We don't assume that only the murdered men may have provided weapons to the murderers. If we start with the premise that the victims provided weapons to the murderers, then all the victims must be considered equally.

Based on what little we knew about the victims at the time of the murders, we knew the suspects used their own guns to murder the victims.
 
  • #512
BBM
I disagree. We don't start any discussion here with "anything is possible," but rather we start what is most likely true based on the facts we know. One of the things we know is partial life histories of victims.

We don't start with the assumption that Chynna may have provided a gun to the men who murdered her, we start with the men who murdered her had a gun. We don't assume that only the murdered men may have provided weapons to the murderers. If we start with the premise that the victims provided weapons to the murderers, then all the victims must be considered equally.

A victim is a victim, no matter if they were armed or not.

“Most likely,”doesn’t mean invariably true.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with believing it is possible that victims may have had weapons, because having weapons doesn’t make you a bad person.

It doesn’t mean you deserve to be murdered, or did anything that caused your murder.

That was not the implication.

At the time, it was merely a possibility, and nothing categorically excluded it.
 
  • #513
What each of us determines is "most likely true" is altogether subjective, based on how each of us weighs the importance, or even the validity of the "facts". If this thread has shown anything, it is that we all interpret the facts differently, and I believe, from a sleuthing point, that is a good thing.
 
Last edited:
  • #514
You just explained what is basically the very core of "extensive suicide" . The person contemplates suicide but is unable to plan a way to do it, all by themselves. They decide they will do it after they have killed others. The killing of others can be more appealing and exciting (thereby giving the subject the motivation to carry out the suicide or resulting in being boxed into a corner and killed by police).

They can even gameify it. In fact, we could say that the legends of Butch and Sundance or Bonnie and Clyde or any number of solo serial killers) show how it can work (until it doesn't, and the players are dead; game over).

The article on gaming and psychopathy (linked upthread, but I can find it in my bookmarks) talked about how two different players find themselves in a new game world, with almost nothing.

One player previously has learned to make friends with others in game, in order to further his own goals. The other player thinks it's funny to kill strangers and take whatever stuff they might have.

The first player was shocked, beginning the game with his new teammate, that the other person immediately destroyed the first stranger they met (and laughed about it). First player was irritated, too, because that new person was basically unarmed, but might have been interesting and useful to have along (remember, all these characters are operated by real people out in the real world - not by the computer).

During World War 1, both sides used soccer to gameify aspects of war in the trenches, particularly the British (for whom it was rather successful).

Underlying all that, though, had to be the very real knowledge that they were on their own suicide mission (MOO). That had to become conscious at some point.

As suicide rates in their age group rise in North America (and elsewhere), we can expect more of the extensive type of suicide, in which the suiciding person decides to take others with them.
Absolutely!
 
  • #515
Exactly! Our entire lives are based upon the choices we make. Too many times, you hear excuses from killers, like, "well, I had poor potty training"... Come On!

This is a nice theory, except not everyone buys into it. Ergo, some people operate outside that worldview.

Those are the people who become serial killers. They are worth study, in and of themselves, as a subculture. If everyone on the planet agreed with your cultural viewpoint, things would go swimmingly. Some cultures have much higher rates of agreement/compliance that Canadian or American.

Do with that what you will. But, in searching for explanations that help with prevention, it's important to look at what the actual perps experienced and articulated, not what shaped you.
 
  • #516
This is a nice theory, except not everyone buys into it. Ergo, some people operate outside that worldview.

Those are the people who become serial killers. They are worth study, in and of themselves, as a subculture. If everyone on the planet agreed with your cultural viewpoint, things would go swimmingly. Some cultures have much higher rates of agreement/compliance that Canadian or American.

Do with that what you will. But, in searching for explanations that help with prevention, it's important to look at what the actual perps experienced and articulated, not what shaped you.

Definitely. Read any book by a person who has studied serial killers, and the takeaway is that their past shaped them, and helped to make them who they are.

It does not excuse their behavior, nor make them any less culpable for the actions.

Not everyone who experiences childhood trauma goes on to commit violence, but it tends to be a common thread among ones who do.
 
  • #517
This is a nice theory, except not everyone buys into it. Ergo, some people operate outside that worldview.

Those are the people who become serial killers. They are worth study, in and of themselves, as a subculture. If everyone on the planet agreed with your cultural viewpoint, things would go swimmingly. Some cultures have much higher rates of agreement/compliance that Canadian or American.

Do with that what you will. But, in searching for explanations that help with prevention, it's important to look at what the actual perps experienced and articulated, not what shaped you.
My response was in reply to something "Otto" said in an earlier post that I agreed with (in blue below). You can choose murder and suicide or not. You can choose to shoot at kids in a school playground (Brenda Spencer) and blame it on "I don't like Mondays" at the time the song came out. She even fancies herself as the original "school shooter" in 1979. It's not what shaped me. Whatever BS and KM experienced and articulated, they still chose to do what they did.

"Bryer's father did indeed admit that he could not be bothered to take any responsibility for Bryer - did not even take the time to put him on a bike with training wheels.

However, that has nothing to do with Bryer being a murderer. Bryer was an adult and he could have done anything he wanted with his life. He choose murder and suicide. The same is true of Kam. He probably did learn to ride a bike, and he too choose murder and suicide."
 
  • #518
Sorry, I don't agree with this scenario. I think they obtained guns before the road trip with the specific intent to use them.

does Walmart sell guns and ammo in Canada?
 
  • #519
  • #520
Actually, it has been stated that Walmart does sell ammo in Canada, under tight security measures, but they do not sell guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
2,820
Total visitors
2,930

Forum statistics

Threads
632,513
Messages
18,627,834
Members
243,174
Latest member
daydoo93
Back
Top