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

[news.talk]

If you go to a cash machine.. say in a 7/11 store.. would you consider that an electronic transaction? I guess officially they really ALL are electronic, even paying for a drink in a bar using your debit/credit card... so I guess you could be right about that distinction.. to me, when I use that word or hear that word (electronic), I'm thinking electronically not-in-person, as opposed to 'using card in person to do an electronic transaction'. More interpretation issues for sure!

If one was trying to establish an alternate timeline, a debit transaction would be a REALLY great way of doing it... I am wondering, what kind of transaction could one make that would *not* be caught on camera? I know bank machines, even the tiny ones in stores, all have cameras. Would bars or restaurants be off camera?

 

[deugirtni]

Last year I was looking into getting a 'cash machine' for an ongoing event that we were going to be hosting.. there was no requirement for us to have a camera. Other businesses as well, whether bars, stores, restaurants, aren't mandated to have cameras. It of course makes sense to have cameras, but the smaller places likely have enough troubles staying in the black without perhaps laying out the money for a camera system. Plus... by the time LE would have gone around for CCTV recordings, would they have still existed from that date/time? I would think that any variety store or gas station would have cameras for sure. I think it's possible though to spend money and perhaps also get 'cash back' without being on camera? I doubt if she necessarily had that much cash somehow, but if Mr.Perp had been trying to establish that she was alive *after* he says he last saw her, I think her bank card could have been used in a bar or something, without being on camera? A drink for the road perhaps?

If one was trying to establish an alternate timeline, a debit transaction would be a REALLY great way of doing it... I am wondering, what kind of transaction could one make that would *not* be caught on camera? I know bank machines, even the tiny ones in stores, all have cameras. Would bars or restaurants be off camera?

 

[evafiore]

No action on any of that stuff?

Detective:
Uh, uh, I don't really want to get into any of the details of the investigation right now, but the reason we're reaching out to the media is because we're hoping that with this media presence and with uh the publicity that somebody will know where she is and has seen her and can come forward with some information to help us in locating her.

ReporterA:
So you can't say for sure whether or not her credit cards have been used or her cellphone has been used since she disappeared?

Detective:
We have her cellphone.

This transcript---very useful! Thanks again --- makes it appear to ME that LE has not confirmed or negated electronic activity, but that could just be my impression. I do agree if she were caught on camera it seems like something they'd broadcast. Could she have bought tickets on a credit card online? Or were there signs of large withdrawals of cash prior to that? They don't really get into that though do mention it's something they look into.

 

[Sillybilly]

Ah, I see where you're going with that. My guess is that she wouldn't have had any life insurance (poor struggling actress) unless she had some kind of job that offered life insurance as part of the benefit plan.. which I don't see any indication that she had a job currently.. and if she did, it would be awfully difficult to coordinate her job with impromtu auditions, etc? Her acting career would make it really hard to hold down a 'regular' job of any sort.

I know of a woman who was having marital difficulties and found out her husband had taken out a life insurance policy on her and was paying the premiums. Probably not the case here, but just something else to wonder about.

 

[evafiore]

It's been over 3 months ... don't know how, without a source of income, someone could remain missing for that length of time and beyond.

Unrelated to a possible income source for SB, I wonder if she had a Will or life insurance.

Going back to that---as it's been over 3 months, it does seem unlikely, if not impossible given the finances that would be required. But if she were to have left willingly, and then something happened to her? There are so many stories of teenagers running away (and probably not meaning to stay away) and then something happening to them...

I realize they're teenagers, and she's an adult, but if she were to have left willingly, she could have put herself in a very vulnerable situation.

 

[evafiore]

I think the detective IS saying that they did NOT see any electronic activity after 12;30am. But he is not making any comment at all as to whether her cards were used in person. So I'm not sure where you are getting the connection from that, to suggest that it was JB that left at 12;30am as opposed to SB?

I wasn't clear---sorry about that. What I mean is that the non-comment on electronic activity or phone activity (which is possible, open to interpretation) does not clarify when the exact last activity was observed. Was it after 12:30am on the 27th? If so, who/what was it? If it were phone activity on the 28th, for example, this could mean that JB left first (*which, I should clarify again, I'm not suggesting as a way of vindicating JB, but rather as a possible understanding of why the family doesn't seem to question the fact that he didn't say anything about SB missing), and SB left afterwards, on the 28th or 29th.

All of these possibilities bother me

 

[deugirtni]

To me, the detective's statement seems clear in that there were no online/electronic financial transactions after 12;30am on Nov 27th:

BBM

ReporterA:
And so the credit cards, you've checked those?

Detective:
We have.

ReporterA:
Have you been able to see whether there's been any action with them?

Detective:
We haven't seen any activity online or electronically.

This transcript---very useful! Thanks again --- makes it appear to ME that LE has not confirmed or negated electronic activity, but that could just be my impression. I do agree if she were caught on camera it seems like something they'd broadcast. Could she have bought tickets on a credit card online? Or were there signs of large withdrawals of cash prior to that? They don't really get into that though do mention it's something they look into.

 

[evafiore]

To me, the detective's statement seems clear in that there were no online/electronic financial transactions after 12;30am on Nov 27th:

BBM

I understand it as "haven't seen any activity online or electronically" as since she was reported missing, skimming over the time between 12:30am on the 27th and Monday...maybe just me though. Same with the phone. Could go back to the "last officially seen"---they saw some electronic/phone activity, but can't confirm it was her.

 

[deugirtni]

It just doesn't seem right somehow that a person could take out life insurance on another person without that person's knowledge. Seems rather creepy. If my husband took out life insurance on me, I'd want to KNOW, thank you very much! OMG! And if I wanted to take out life insurance on someone, I'd feel really awkward and creepy if I didn't tell them about it? But you're right, there doesn't seem to be any requirement for the insured to be notified.. other than.. if the amount reaches a certain limit, in my experience, the insurer requires a medical exam, performed by someone from the insurer's choosing, so that would let the person know. That would sure be scary to find out that your spouse, with whom you were having marital difficulties, took out life insurance on you, without advising you. Ugh. I hope this woman that you know of, bolted out of THAT house!

I know of a woman who was having marital difficulties and found out her husband had taken out a life insurance policy on her and was paying the premiums. Probably not the case here, but just something else to wonder about.

 

[deugirtni]

How much bad karma can one person HAVE in one day though? First, she decides to disappear and not tell anyone.. and THEN she ends up presumably dead due to foul play.. but even more.. her body is never found, no sign, never seen by anyone, no tips? What are the chances?

Going back to that---as it's been over 3 months, it does seem unlikely, if not impossible given the finances that would be required. But if she were to have left willingly, and then something happened to her? There are so many stories of teenagers running away (and probably not meaning to stay away) and then something happening to them...

I realize they're teenagers, and she's an adult, but if she were to have left willingly, she could have put herself in a very vulnerable situation.

 

[deugirtni]

The non-comment was in regard to anything BUT the online/electronic activity. The detective said no phone use, because they HAVE the phone; and he said they did not see any online or electronic activity, obviously after she went missing - he didn't elaborate on what she did or didn't do before the time she went missing.

Detective:
Soo she's obviously not using her cellphone as we have it. Um family was more than cooperative in supplying that to us.

Detective:
We haven't seen any activity online or electronically.

I wasn't clear---sorry about that. What I mean is that the non-comment on electronic activity or phone activity (which is possible, open to interpretation) does not clarify when the exact last activity was observed. Was it after 12:30am on the 27th? If so, who/what was it? If it were phone activity on the 28th, for example, this could mean that JB left first (*which, I should clarify again, I'm not suggesting as a way of vindicating JB, but rather as a possible understanding of why the family doesn't seem to question the fact that he didn't say anything about SB missing), and SB left afterwards, on the 28th or 29th.

All of these possibilities bother me

 

[evafiore]

How much bad karma can one person HAVE in one day though? First, she decides to disappear and not tell anyone.. and THEN she ends up presumably dead due to foul play.. but even more.. her body is never found, no sign, never seen by anyone, no tips? What are the chances?

Not necessarily in one day though, could have been days afterwards...and there are predators who can spot vulnerability easily (e.g., Hannah Graham case) and take advantage of it. Some people see a woman travelling alone as vulnerable. Another case would be Jinisina Stonehouse. She ran away, they think she may have stayed missing willingly, and has for 30 years, but no one knows---she may have been murdered a long time ago.

 

[evafiore]

The non-comment was in regard to anything BUT the online/electronic activity. The detective said no phone use, because they HAVE the phone; and he said they did not see any online or electronic activity, obviously after she went missing - he didn't elaborate on what she did or didn't do before the time she went missing.

But did they have the phone between 12:30am on the 27th and Monday? I interpret that they haven't observed anything since they acquired the phone, and he could be skimming over details from the hours/days after 12:30am on the 27th...

 

[deugirtni]

If she had online activity or electronic transactions after Nov 27th at 12;30am when she was last reported to have been seen, I'm sure they would have indicated that 'although she was last seen then, we saw online activity since then', or 'electronic transactions since then', but instead, the detective stated that there was 'no online or electronic activity'.

And the phone.. they have the phone, so like he said, 'obviously she isn't using her phone'. So if she was using her phone AFTER she was last seen, I'm pretty sure he would have said, 'she was last seen Nov 27th at 12;30, but she was using her phone up until ????, so we know that her and her phone were alive and together up until X date, but we now have her phone. Don't you think? Why would they lead the public to think she had dropped off the face of the earth at the time she was reported to have been last seen by her ex husband, if she was phoning people and doing online activities after that time?

The 'last officially seen' comment... it was 'last officially seen' on the day BEFORE (Nov 26th) she was last reported to have been seen by her ex husband (Nov 27th). That means, they must not be counting the ex husband's report as 'official', for whatever reason.

I understand it as "haven't seen any activity online or electronically" as since she was reported missing, skimming over the time between 12:30am on the 27th and Monday...maybe just me though. Same with the phone. Could go back to the "last officially seen"---they saw some electronic/phone activity, but can't confirm it was her.

 

[evafiore]

If she had online activity or electronic transactions after Nov 27th at 12;30am when she was last reported to have been seen, I'm sure they would have indicated that 'although she was last seen then, we saw online activity since then', or 'electronic transactions since then', but instead, the detective stated that there was 'no online or electronic activity'.

And the phone.. they have the phone, so like he said, 'obviously she isn't using her phone'. So if she was using her phone AFTER she was last seen, I'm pretty sure he would have said, 'she was last seen Nov 27th at 12;30, but she was using her phone up until ????, so we know that her and her phone were alive and together up until X date, but we now have her phone. Don't you think? Why would they lead the public to think she had dropped off the face of the earth at the time she was reported to have been last seen by her ex husband, if she was phoning people and doing online activities after that time?

The 'last officially seen' comment... it was 'last officially seen' on the day BEFORE (Nov 26th) she was last reported to have been seen by her ex husband (Nov 27th). That means, they must not be counting the ex husband's report as 'official', for whatever reason.

Ahaa...sorry, I was confused, for some reason I thought they were referring to JB seeing her as last official sighting.

I'm not sure that they would report the details on her phone activity, particularly if it were a potential lead they wanted to monitor discreetly. Perhaps she was communicating with a POI?

 

[deugirtni]

Don't you think we would have heard inklings around the internet that she was seen here or there, or that yes, she had every intention of leaving her home, family, and ex husband behind, during those days? Sightings? But there is nothing. Instead, the family says it is out of character, they are close-knit, she was very social.. she had functions to attend, tickets had been purchased, jobs set up, Christmas went by, presumably she is without her dog, if it still exists. Why disappear willingly.... with presumably not much money. I don't want to be a downer, but I hold out, imho, zero hope of her being alive.

Did someone fairly recently post the statistics on how many missing are permanently missing? Aren't most of them found, in one way or another? If she was killed by some random predator, where is her body? Why hasn't she been spotted?

All we hear is silence.

Not necessarily in one day though, could have been days afterwards...and there are predators who can spot vulnerability easily (e.g., Hannah Graham case) and take advantage of it. Some people see a woman travelling alone as vulnerable. Another case would be Jinisina Stonehouse. She ran away, they think she may have stayed missing willingly, and has for 30 years, but no one knows---she may have been murdered a long time ago.

 

[deugirtni]

Of course they haven't reported on any details of who she was calling on her phone before she disappeared into thin air. But they did report that they have her phone, so therefore she isn't using it. If she had used her phone to make calls after she was last reported to have been seen and before the police nabbed her phone, then they would have said, 'last seen but 'she' was using her phone up until JB got home and told us it was there at the house, but she is missing'. It doesn't make sense, does it?

Ahaa...sorry, I was confused, for some reason I thought they were referring to JB seeing her as last official sighting.

I'm not sure that they would report the details on her phone activity, particularly if it were a potential lead they wanted to monitor discreetly. Perhaps she was communicating with a POI?

 

[evafiore]

Don't you think we would have heard inklings around the internet that she was seen here or there, or that yes, she had every intention of leaving her home, family, and ex husband behind, during those days? Sightings? But there is nothing. Instead, the family says it is out of character, they are close-knit, she was very social.. she had functions to attend, tickets had been purchased, jobs set up, Christmas went by, presumably she is without her dog, if it still exists. Why disappear willingly.... with presumably not much money. I don't want to be a downer, but I hold out, imho, zero hope of her being alive.

Did someone fairly recently post the statistics on how many missing are permanently missing? Aren't most of them found, in one way or another? If she was killed by some random predator, where is her body? Why hasn't she been spotted?

All we hear is silence.

But if she were just intending to "unplug" (as one of her friends hoped for on one of the LARP sites)? Wanted to take a few days away and then ran into foul play?

Yet another thing I've been mulling over is that she may have disappeared, impulsively, as a reaction to a conflict with JB. She may not have planned ahead, but did a few things within a few hours and took off. Women are more likely to resort to less fatal forms of suicide attempts than men, as a cry for help or to manipulate someone...would disappearing for a few days have been a cry for help, but then spiraled into bad luck? By bringing that up, I'm not saying she was suicidal, but perhaps she disappeared as some sort of shot at JB (echoing the potential meaning of the "funzies" post) or as a cry for help?

 

[evafiore]

Of course they haven't reported on any details of who she was calling on her phone before she disappeared into thin air. But they did report that they have her phone, so therefore she isn't using it. If she had used her phone to make calls after she was last reported to have been seen and before the police nabbed her phone, then they would have said, 'last seen but 'she' was using her phone up until JB got home and told us it was there at the house, but she is missing'. It doesn't make sense, does it?

What you're saying makes sense, but what I'm saying goes back to CPS maintaining the integrity of the investigation. I think that *maybe* they're sitting on some facts, and the electronic/phone activity between Nov 27 12:30am and Monday is one of them. They don't actually state the last known phone activity or electronic activity anywhere, they just kind of leave it to assumption. It would have been a good "pointed question" for a reporter to ask. We know that since they've had the phone, she hasn't used it, though we have nothing concrete about those few days before they got the phone. Could they estimate when it was last charged? Turned on/off? Was there a computer left behind that had been accessed/turned on or off, sometime after 12:30am? Is her computer even there? Did she own one? Had any text messages or emails received after 12:30am been read by someone prior to LE?

Just thinking about that further...people were sending messages to her (there's a post about her brother sending something and her not responding, on the Friday IIRC). It would be interesting if there was someone who was a regular contact and then just stopped sometime before she was reported missing (would the perp bother texting/calling someone he knew was dead?).

There's so much about this case that is not reported, that in many cases, is---like "last seen wearing." Why hasn't that been released? We can assume that she was wearing clothes, but letting the public know exactly what she was wearing/may be wearing would help. As a financially-strapped actress, how many winter coats would she own? I'm sure that they could look through what was left at the home, and through the process of elimination, determine what coat she may have been wearing (or if she was). What did she wear to the audition? Was it videotaped? Wouldn't it be helpful to release that if that were the last time she was on video? With the number of CCTV in her area, surely she would have been caught on video sometime prior to or after her last being seen?

For some reason, they seem to be withholding a lot of information that would be useful for the public to help find her. I agree, all we hear is silence, unfortunately. It seems as though the information they have at this point is more useful than anything the public could provide, and they don't need to appeal further or release anything more.

Really want to hear something about this case. I can't imagine how her family would be feeling right now.

 

[otto]

Was she considered by her sister to possibly be in distress because of something her ex husband told the family, perhaps something like, 'she texted me right before she 'left' at 12;30am to say she was leaving' ?

BBM

Thanks for the link.

I think there's a mistake in the interpretation. Use of the word "distress" seems to be used to describe people that are missing, not to explain why they are missing. Shannon is missing and may be in distress. That what the statement says. If someone locates her, she may be in distress.

Missing people may be in distress due to the fact that a traumatic event resulted in their disappearance. If they are found, they are most likely in distress.

Similarly, in the second case, the medical distress did not cause the disappearance, it is a result of the event that caused the disappearance.

"For the social butterfly, the disappearing act is unheard of and her colleagues, families and friends are worried.

She skipped her weekend rehearsals and engagements, and was last seen in her Inglewood apartment on Wednesday. Burgess is undergoing a messy divorce, and her sister Erin Madill said Burgess may be in distress."

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/12...o-family-said-its-not-like-her-to-dissappear/

"Police described the couples' disappearance as a homicide, and said the amount of blood found in the Liknes's house suggested at least one person would have been in medical distress because of a violent crime."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...s-to-alvin-kathy-liknes-at-memorial-1.2779924


the disappearance may cause distress
distress did not cause the disappearance