That really *does* seem to be an interesting tidbit of info. Too bad LE doesn't release more info, like timing. Were these last financial transactions done before 12:30am on Nov 27th? Or after? I believe family had said she hadn't been heard from or seen since then, but that doesn't necessarily mean her bank or credit card wasn't used somewhere?
And I recall the family saying they had put up posters in the Inglewood area: "The family has put up posters around Inglewood where her last financial transactions were made." (
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/shannon-madill-missing-calgarian-sought-by-police-1.2862214).
Lala, you're right, if those financial transactions were not at a bank, then there may not be any CCTV footage of her using her cards, so really, it could it have been anyone using her card?? Jeez. If these transactions were prior to her last sighting at her home by her estranged husband, then it sounds like she came back to Calgary, went places in Inglewood, and then came home and did some social networking.. but then what? But if these transactions were AFTER her last sighting at her home by her estranged husband, then perhaps that is why LE and her family do not suspect him being involved? 'She 'left' with her keys and her purse'. If she became subject to foul play at some point, then why haven't they found her?
This almost sounds like it could start making some sense.. she returns from presumably Edmonton on the evening of November 26th, too late to attend the YY's Development Night.. does some social networking (last post on FB was.... I forget.. perhaps 9;15pm??), passes by her estranged husband at 12;30am on her way out the door with her keys and her purse.. perhaps she had made plans with someone on FB?? Or OKC?? Or just friends?? Goes out, spends money somewhere, perhaps various places in Inglewood.. LE catch up with this info (finding the financial transactions, finding the social activity through her phone and FB and OKC accounts?), LE tracks down the last people she had known contact with (through her phone, FB, etc).. they tell LE that she was heading to Vancouver or Toronto (to get the heat off of themselves).. and nothing since then. If this scenario is what happened, then it makes perhaps less sense that JB wouldn't have been worried that she hadn't come home, but then again, he could have been used to her staying out for a couple of nights (mostly non-monogamous) and then assumed she travelled with someone to Edmonton in time for her scheduled appointments there, and nobody may have told him she didn't show up....... Or........ someone could be lying.. and could have actually accompanied her on her way out the door at 12;30am, and then used her debit cards at a couple of locations, with or without her, and then ditched her on the way home? That would be too risky though.. to potentially have people at these Inglewood places saying, 'no we didn't see her, but we saw her husband'.. or 'yes, we saw her and she was with
'... ???
Agree, that's an interesting tidbit of info. Transaction might not be an ATM either, could be a interac transaction at a restaurant, bar, pub, drugstore, pay phone (if they still exist, I know there are a few out there and you can use a card to charge on it), etc.
Wonder if LE is evading to not give away a certain location in case other people (or potential suspects) were in same location that night… so many scenarios here!
