Found Deceased Canada - Shannon Burgess, 25, Calgary, 26 Nov 2014 - #3 *Arrest*

[news.talk]

I agree. I really hope the information was validated by more than one person or she was seen on camera somewhere.

See, I am thinking that since it was the 26th that she was "officially" last seen - That it was by the Director in Edmonton that BH - (one of her friends) posted about on FB. Maybe... That is why the last seen date is different than what JB reports...

 

[deugirtni]

Jeez you are really brutal these days arentcha?? Can't a woman make a typo any more these days??

"the family called then called police"...

Is this a case for The Department of Redundancy Department?

 

[news.talk]

Jeez you are really brutal these days arentcha?? Can't a woman make a typo any more these days??

He has Man-O-Pause. [emoji39]

 

[deugirtni]

I've been wondering along those lines too. I can't help it. And then I think about... what was missing, and what was NOT missing.. and the fact that the phone was AT HOME.. and thinking.. well, ifffffffff something along those lines had happened.. then why not send the phone along too.. and also thinking, it would be a more perfect story, wouldn't it(?) if she had just simply never made it back to Calgary at all.. but.. the fact that she had posted on FB that she WAS back, kind of screwed it up for him, because then it looks like something happened after she returned.. without that FB post, it would just look like she hadn't made it back...
But.. if it was in fact HIM who was responsible for getting her back, then of course, it would want to appear that that part was successful.. and how to prove that.. by having FB posts saying so.. so.. leave the phone to prove it then?
I don't think this post is very clear, sorry, I seem to be out of words tonight, but basically just thinking how the phone being left behind could work for or against a potential perp, and wondering if it has any bearing.. would love to know details of whether she travelled to Edm for just that one day, how she went there and home again, or if she had stayed on from the weekend before and then driven her vehicle home... and how the FB msgs fit into those scenarios posted via the phone.
Would a cellphone, after the fact, be able to tell LE where and when it pinged off of certain cell towers? I really doubt if LE would have investigated it that thoroughly though, since there is no 'evidence' of foul play, and the family seems not too concerned, likely thinking she left on her own accord?

I still wonder if SB wrote that last FB post on the 26th and if she actually ever *returned* from Edmonton at all. It is just as likely that she was driven there and back by JB , due to car problems. There is a LOT of empty space, fields for miles and other places someone could dump a body. He may have had access to her login info, made a post and said she came back.

 

[deugirtni]

All I can say is, you poor thing. Ugh.

Secondly..... notice how in the family press conference, EM says 'and Josh returned home that night'... would that be an automatic thing to come out of her mouth, or would she instead have said, 'when Josh went to the house', or 'when Josh went to her house', or 'when Josh went to see if she had arrived home yet'.. or something other than 'returned home'?

ETA What I mean is.. if the 2 were staying in separate residences through this messy divorce period, then surely EM would have known that, since she is the one who reportedly said they were going through a messy divorce and that SB might be upset, or whatever the word was that she used.. if she knew they were staying apart, then would she have said 'returned home'?

I *shared* a home with my ex for two years after we seperated. We were both on title and due to child and dog, he would be there often. He was living elsewhere but we still *shared* a home. A couple going through a seperation don't generally like to actively live in the same house. Talk about War of the Roses! Personally, based on my life experiences, I find it MORE likely that he was staying with friends or family. Just because you need a minimum income to lease the unit, doesn't mean you have to be there 24/7. Leases are commonly 1 year... They are not going to ask for proof of actual residency in the middle of a lease, nor do they check in everyday to ensure you are there.

We also don't even know if the dog is still around.

 

[deugirtni]

On my view, I can see the times she made both posts, the first one, and then the edit.. they were minutes apart. ... like she posted initially about the brakes, then about 4 minutes later someone corrected her spelling, and then about 4 minutes later she edited her post to correct the typo.. and then one minute later she thanked the person for correcting her. I won't post the pic or paste it because we'll get the times all screwed up again since mine show 2 hours ahead of her real time. Mine doesn't say whether she posted from a phone or computer, or where her location was at the time. But yes.. definitely possible.

It seems she might have commonly accessed her Facebook through her smartphone... A phone she "left" at home before disappearing... "Someone, with access to the phone *could* have posted on her behalf.


""Investigators now hows her phone and computer so if you see her online thats why""

Also... I see there is an edit on that 11:54 post - It says 11:54 to me and I am in Calgary.... It doesn't say the time of the edit, but it does say that it was the next day.

 

[news.talk]

I've been wondering along those lines too. I can't help it. And then I think about... what was missing, and what was NOT missing.. and the fact that the phone was AT HOME.. and thinking.. well, ifffffffff something along those lines had happened.. then why not send the phone along too.. and also thinking, it would be a more perfect story, wouldn't it(?) if she had just simply never made it back to Calgary at all.. but.. the fact that she had posted on FB that she WAS back, kind of screwed it up for him, because then it looks like something happened after she returned.. without that FB post, it would just look like she hadn't made it back...
But.. if it was in fact HIM who was responsible for getting her back, then of course, it would want to appear that that part was successful.. and how to prove that.. by having FB posts saying so.. so.. leave the phone to prove it then?
I don't think this post is very clear, sorry, I seem to be out of words tonight, but basically just thinking how the phone being left behind could work for or against a potential perp, and wondering if it has any bearing.. would love to know details of whether she travelled to Edm for just that one day, how she went there and home again, or if she had stayed on from the weekend before and then driven her vehicle home... and how the FB msgs fit into those scenarios posted via the phone.
Would a cellphone, after the fact, be able to tell LE where and when it pinged off of certain cell towers? I really doubt if LE would have investigated it that thoroughly though, since there is no 'evidence' of foul play, and the family seems not too concerned, likely thinking she left on her own accord?

I keep thinking that if JB is guilty, and people knew he had driven her to and from Edmonton, he could have dumped her on the way back, he would have to come up with a cover story... He would likely post a FB post to solidify the story that she returned... She didn't seem to commonly post many statuses on a regular basis, but 'conveniently' posted one the night she 'disappeared' - She 'went out' and took her keys and wallet but not her phone (headscratcher), and yet in another convenience, JB was the last to see her in Ramsey - where the phone she used to post on social-media was coincidentally found left behind. Then he doesn't call family for days, shows ZERO concern as evidenced on social-media and in the presser, and has gone on prowling on dating sites with a week of his wife's disappearance... hmmm...

Could LE be possibly working a suspect angle and that is why it has been DEAD quiet from the family and LE? The no flyer thing or social-media pleas tells me that the family was told not too, for investigative reasons. It was the same way with Lisa Mitchell... She was 'supposedly' in other cities, the family got VERY quiet and two years later, the husband is charged with her murder - Coincidentally, after a Mr. Big type undercover sting.

ETA: It would also be convenient for her car to 'suddenly' have the brakes go... The day before she had to be in Edmonton. She would need a ride from someone...

 

[news.talk]

On my view, I can see the times she made both posts, the first one, and then the edit.. they were minutes apart. ... like she posted initially about the brakes, then about 4 minutes later someone corrected her spelling, and then about 4 minutes later she edited her post to correct the typo.. and then one minute later she thanked the person for correcting her. I won't post the pic or paste it because we'll get the times all screwed up again since mine show 2 hours ahead of her real time. Mine doesn't say whether she posted from a phone or computer, or where her location was at the time. But yes.. definitely possible.

If you see the post asking whether someone else has been logging on as her on Facebook, a family member says that it was the police - they had her phone.

 

[deugirtni]

And then I recall something in MSM .. whether it was a statement attributed to the family in the newspaper, or something said at the family presser, I can't remember, but the sister said something like they were checking all the last places she was known to be at.. ok found it.. so does this mean..
i)the places she went to BEFORE she went to Edm on the Wed, or
ii)AFTER she arrived back in Calgary on Wed night.. before her ex saw her at 12;30am, or
iii)AFTER she arrived back in Calgary on Wed night, and AFTER her ex saw her at 12;30am?

If the third option were the case, then wouldn't LE, family, MSM be saying 'evidence that she was spending money or seen in this area after her ex last saw her'??? But they have steadfastly held to her not being seen after HE last saw her. Hmm

Also...... just occurred to me.. I think we're rehashing again.. but... in the event the family/LE found indication that her bank card was used AFTER her ex last saw her at 12;30am, then who is to say who exactly it was that went in and used it? The wallet is missing, right?

BBM:

Family members have been distributing missing person posters and checking businesses in Inglewood that Burgess had stopped in prior to her disappearance.
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/police-search-for-calgary-woman-who-disappeared-a-week-ago

I agree. I really hope the information was validated by more than one person or she was seen on camera somewhere.

 

[news.talk]

We have ANOTHER missing person in Calgary... Couldn't find a page here, but if anyone wants to start one, here is the info:

http://globalnews.ca/news/1859894/m...ld-asks-calgarians-to-help-find-her-daughter/


https://m.facebook.com/pages/Missing-Shyla-Behl/610226495779458?sk=timeline

 

[deugirtni]

Ok, I'm curious..

If someone is being questioned.. and say they have 'an alibi' which is 'I was with my friend/mother/girlfriend/daughter (or other person who cares about whether I go to jail or not)..... is that a good enough alibi to just rule someone out?? Or would LE take those kind of alibis with a grain of salt?

I think if someone else were there to also provide evidence that she was present in her home at 12;30am on Nov 27th, that would have been reported, MOO.. am I wrong in thinking that? They wouldnt' have had to say who it was specifically, or what the relationship was, but wouldnt' they have stated that?

maybe he had an alibi,, I mean, jb might have been the last to see her but the person he might have been entertaining might have been one of the last to hear her leave?

 

[deugirtni]

Yes, that is REALLY curious, as to why they would make a point of distinguishing 'officially last seen', and 'last seen by ex'.. wow... so does 'officially' mean because she was perhaps seen by more than ONE person, or does it mean because it was by a non-family member.. or.. wait.. I wonder if it could mean because the Director has a videotape proving that she was present on the date/time of her audition?

See, I am thinking that since it was the 26th that she was "officially" last seen - That it was by the Director in Edmonton that BH - (one of her friends) posted about on FB. Maybe... That is why the last seen date is different than what JB reports...

 

[news.talk]

And then I recall something in MSM .. whether it was a statement attributed to the family in the newspaper, or something said at the family presser, I can't remember, but the sister said something like they were checking all the last places she was known to be at.. ok found it.. so does this mean..
i)the places she went to BEFORE she went to Edm on the Wed, or
ii)AFTER she arrived back in Calgary on Wed night.. before her ex saw her at 12;30am, or
iii)AFTER she arrived back in Calgary on Wed night, and AFTER her ex saw her at 12;30am?

If the third option were the case, then wouldn't LE, family, MSM be saying 'evidence that she was spending money or seen in this area after her ex last saw her'??? But they have steadfastly held to her not being seen after HE last saw her. Hmm

Also...... just occurred to me.. I think we're rehashing again.. but... in the event the family/LE found indication that her bank card was used AFTER her ex last saw her at 12;30am, then who is to say who exactly it was that went in and used it? The wallet is missing, right?

BBM:

Her wallet was supposedly missing... If her bank card was used, there would be CCTV most likely... Any store or atm has CCTV. It would be another way to alibi an alternate timeline if her bank card could be used without CCTV.

 

[Leischa]

I keep thinking that if JB is guilty, and people knew he had driven her to and from Edmonton, he could have dumped her on the way back, he would have to come up with a cover story... He would likely post a FB post to solidify the story that she returned... She didn't seem to commonly post many statuses on a regular basis, but 'conveniently' posted one the night she 'disappeared' - She 'went out' and took her keys and wallet but not her phone (headscratcher), and yet in another convenience, JB was the last to see her in Ramsey - where the phone she used to post on social-media was coincidentally found left behind. Then he doesn't call family for days, shows ZERO concern as evidenced on social-media and in the presser, and has gone on prowling on dating sites with a week of his wife's disappearance... hmmm...

Could LE be possibly working a suspect angle and that is why it has been DEAD quiet from the family and LE? The no flyer thing or social-media pleas tells me that the family was told not too, for investigative reasons. It was the same way with Lisa Mitchell... She was 'supposedly' in other cities, the family got VERY quiet and two years later, the husband is charged with her murder - Coincidentally, after a Mr. Big type undercover sting.

I really think you're on to something here... The phone thing has always been the weirdest element for me in this case. Why did she take her wallet and keys but left her phone behind, especially at that time of the night?

And also, what you're saying about how she ''conveniently'' posted on Facebook right before her disappearance rings a bell in my head. She did post from time to time but she posted a lot on the days leading to her disappearance. If she had the Facebook application on her cell phone, it would've been a piece of cake for JB to post on her behalf after he did whatever he could've done to her. I mean, all you have to do to access someone's Facebook on their cell phone is click on the icon and tadam!

And finally, I find it very odd that he went to dating sites not long after she disappeared. Even if they were in the process of getting a divorce, didn't he feel the least pained by her disappearance? Maybe people deal in different ways with stress and emotion but this is a strange way to act when you're supposed to be turning everything upside down to find someone that you actually once were in love with! If this type of thing happened to my husband, I would be so worried that I'd probably be sick to my stomach.

Anyway, I agree with everything you wrote in your post. Something is fishy...

 

[news.talk]

Yes, that is REALLY curious, as to why they would make a point of distinguishing 'officially last seen', and 'last seen by ex'.. wow... so does 'officially' mean because she was perhaps seen by more than ONE person, or does it mean because it was by a non-family member.. or.. wait.. I wonder if it could mean because the Director has a videotape proving that she was present on the date/time of her audition?

It could be any of the above. I imagine officially would mean "confirmed by video, more than one non-related person" - I think that LE would be remiss if they just took his word for a time. They probably have to go by the last time it could be verified.

 

[LoisLane]

See, I am thinking that since it was the 26th that she was "officially" last seen - That it was by the Director in Edmonton that BH - (one of her friends) posted about on FB. Maybe... That is why the last seen date is different than what JB reports...

I thought that as well but the sister said on her FB that she was last seen in Calgary not Edmonton.

 

[news.talk]

I thought that as well but the sister said on her FB that she was last seen in Calgary not Edmonton.

But what if the sister was going by the time JB gave - the 12:30 on the 27th story? The sister did make it seem that she trusted him.

 

[deugirtni]

I'm thinking we should leave the screenshots to those living in the same timezone, or we'll get all mixed up with the times again.. would be great if a Calgary person could post their screenshot from a pc showing the edit history though??

<snipped image for space>

That's curious .. when I click "Edit History" it definitely shows the times of the edit (but iirc there are some strange differences whether you are viewing from a PC or smartphone .. I'm on PC). I've taken a screenshot, but am in a rush right now and don't have time to do a crop/post. If y'all insist on it, i can post it later .. but only if you insist

 

[LoisLane]

But what if the sister was going by the time JB gave - the 12:30 on the 27th story? The sister did make it seem that she trusted him.

True. Would investigators offer only solid information or keep their details private from family in regards to timelines?

 

[deugirtni]

That's another thing... *if* LE had obtained any kind of CCTV showing SB at ANY place (7/11??, a bar, a bank machine, just walking past a place of business/gas station, anything???), then surely they would have posted it publicly to show what she was last seen wearing.. and to jog peoples' memories, etc.. plus.. they would have then HAD proof of what she was last seen wearing... but yet nothing.. so if SB did go out and about AFTER her ex husband says he last saw her, then why is there no CCTV.. and if the family was out checking the places where she 'stopped in' prior to disappearing.. didn't any of those places have CCTV?? Seems to me that so many businesses now have CCTV.. but I guess it is an issue that so many days had passed since people even knew she was missing (from 12:30am Nov 27th until the press conference on December 4th), prob many of those potential sightings would have by then been erased?

I agree. I really hope the information was validated by more than one person or she was seen on camera somewhere.