Canada - Terry, 27, & Hailey Blanchette, 2, Blairmore, AB, 14 Sept 2015 #2

[Tricia]

If you have a problem with a post you need to alert on it. It's the little triangle in the lower left hand corner of the post.

That is the ONLY way we know if a thread is going off topic. You have to alert. If you don't then nothing gets done.

We Have a very small volunteer staff that works their behind off every single day. We cannot babysit a thread and make sure it stays on topic.

We don't allow off topic posts. We don't like them any more than you do.

When you alert on a post it doesn't mean we will get to it right away. Depending on what is going happening on other forums and how many volunteers we have on the board at the time determines how quickly we can get to a post.

Because the posts complaining were alerted on I will be removing those particular posts. Complaining is going off topic which is against the rules.

If you have specific complaints feel free to email [email protected]

Could someone please alert on the other posts that are off-topic other than the complaints?

Thank you,
Tricia

 

[ElleElle]

I think he lost his temper for some reason, and the child saw the altercation. And with the possibility of her being able to identify him, he panicked, took her away, and then killed her.

In all honesty, I believe it would be hard for a 2 year to identify someone. There is a reason why he did this, and we will have to wait for a motive. I don't believe he is insane, but may have some issues if he did a alot of drugs and drank. Being in a small town, it could be anything.

 

[ElleElle]

Re BC:

Using a name theres a search available here:
https://justice.gov.bc.ca/cso/esearch/criminal/partySearch.do

Daily court list are just that - available for only 5 days following:
https://justice.gov.bc.ca/cso/courtLists.do
http://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/courts/court-lists/criminal/index.htm

Re AB:

Going to check... ETA: sorry...no dice :dunno:

I don't why AB does not have a search for the province. Other provinces do, such as BC and MB, as you mentioned.

 

[Itisclear]

I remember the news saying there may be a connection with the first murder to these ones. It could be possible that DS killed HM in rage and thought they might be close to finding out it was him .. or Terry knew something about him breaking into that womans house or terry knew something. So he thought what the heck I'm already in jail for life might as well take my enemy out. Or he was a breaking and entering weirdo an everyone was a casualty of that. Do we even have any legit sources that says that Terry was still behaving good. Is it at all possible that he isn't as innocent in everything as we think (as much as I doubt this). It's quite the story with so many shocking facts I'm sure. It's just plain weird!!! I think the weirdest thing is leaving her at his aunties. I just can't understand why. Why not the millions of bushes that are around? and someone had to of been on that property that night???

 

[swedie]

Boy, there's a lot of deep thinking going on in here overnight.

How about he simply killed Dad because of a beef between the two of them and the daughter was abducted and taken because he didn't really know what to do about her ?

Ultimately, if he didn't want to get caught, she had to go as well, because she knew who he was.

Saretzky isn't some sort of a criminal mastermind, he's just a pot smoking bum that most likely got higher than a kite on a meth and alcohol cocktail and went on a killing spree for some unknown reason. He'll explain it sooner or later, if he hasn't already.

Hahaha I totally agree steelman

I also agree with your speculation for the most part. And if he hasn't explained his motive yet or never has an explanation, the evidence will come out to give the answers. MOO.

 

[swedie]

In all honesty, I believe it would be hard for a 2 year to identify someone. There is a reason why he did this, and we will have to wait for a motive. I don't believe he is insane, but may have some issues if he did a alot of drugs and drank. Being in a small town, it could be anything.

I agree with you also Elle. Doubt HD would have been able to ID DS and be a credible witness unless of course he had been a "regular" in her life. Had she met him a half a dozen times throughout her life, not likely she'd be able to verbalize concisely and be reliable.

JMO but my theory is DS went to Terry's house intending to kidnap Hailey for someone in the middle of the night but Terry woke up and there was a physical confrontation ending in Terry's murder. DS fled with Hailey as that was the plan (abduction), but once he got away from the house and had a moment to reflect on what really happened (Terry's unintended murder), he realized if Hailey survived and was given to that certain someone, there would an investigation as to how Hailey got from her deceased father's house to that certain someone. He knew it would eventually lead back to him and he would get charged with kidnapping. DS figured he was stealthy enough to get in out out of Terry's house in the middle of the night, without detection or confrontation and did not plan the "what ifs".

After the fact, DS figured by "getting rid" of HD, he would lessen his connection, with being a suspect in Terry's murder. Whoever he planned the abduction with, had they taken HD into their custody, they'd have a lot of explaining to do. They themselves could have been facing kidnapping charges or conspiracy to commit along with DS, even if they were not present during the abduction IIRC. Regardless, that other person was taking a huge illegal risk also. Or that person could have lied against DS saying he just randomly showed up with Hailey, dropped her off with them and they had no knowledge prior to her abduction, she was going to be abducted. And of course at the juncture, Terry was dead and DS would be the prime suspect because that certain someone would reveal to LE who dropped Hailey off to them. DS was in a no win situation regardless. Getting rid of Hailey, there was no longer it's their word against his fear. For that certain person who planned the abduction with DS, to now came forward, they would be guilty also. Better for those involved to remain quiet because what's done is done, nothing will bring Hailey back kwim.
ALL JMO.

 

[Power of Two]

Boy, there's a lot of deep thinking going on in here overnight.

How about he simply killed Dad because of a beef between the two of them and the daughter was abducted and taken because he didn't really know what to do about her ?

Ultimately, if he didn't want to get caught, she had to go as well, because she knew who he was.

Saretzky isn't some sort of a criminal mastermind, he's just a pot smoking bum that most likely got higher than a kite on a meth and alcohol cocktail and went on a killing spree for some unknown reason. He'll explain it sooner or later, if he hasn't already.

Jumping in here to wonder how or if a 2 year old child (if she were still alive) would be able to identify and be a credible witness? Hailey was 2 years and 9 months old at the time of this terrible event. Some children are very well spoken and articulate at this age. Others are not. How were her language skills? Where would the courts stand on this issue? Children this age may be able to identify family members or Grandparents etc. by name or facsimiles (Gigi, Nana, Bobo). I guess my question is.... why did he have to take her, as well?? Unless he was a very memorable person in her life, chances are she would not be able to identify him. IMO

 

[Power of Two]

swedie and ElleElle... we obviously have mental telepathy.

 

[ElleElle]

I just thought of something.

Perhaps TB and DS did something horrible together and TB was going to rat DS out. DS may have been under the influence of something and showed up at TB's not knowing HDB was there. Not sure if there was a scuffle, but perhaps and he took HDB out to kill her as well as he was not in the right frame of mind. He disposed of her, and then sobered up and realized what he did.

Touching on Itisclear's theory.

 

[jmcgladr]

Why was my last post removed? Why is it OK to bring up the idea that DS was hired by a serial killer, but not OK to cast doubt on that theory?

 

[Matzoh]

JMO but my theory is DS went to Terry's house intending to kidnap Hailey for someone in the middle of the night but Terry woke up and there was a physical confrontation ending in Terry's murder. DS fled with Hailey as that was the plan (abduction), but once he got away from the house and had a moment to reflect on what really happened (Terry's unintended murder), he realized if Hailey survived and was given to that certain someone, there would an investigation as to how Hailey got from her deceased father's house to that certain someone. He knew it would eventually lead back to him and he would get charged with kidnapping. DS figured he was stealthy enough to get in out out of Terry's house in the middle of the night, without detection or confrontation and did not plan the "what ifs".

Swedie, I see what you're getting at here, but I'm curious why you seem so convinced that DS was acting on the orders of "someone else"...? Having seen no evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe he acted alone, but I'd be interested to know what brought you to your conclusion.

Personally, I think I'm leaning toward the "high as a kite/murdered TB when things got out of hand/panicked and killed HDB" theory. The suggestion that TB might somehow be tied into DS's previous charges is interesting as well. JMHO.

 

[ElleElle]

Swedie, I see what you're getting at here, but I'm curious why you seem so convinced that DS was acting on the orders of "someone else"...? Having seen no evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe he acted alone, but I'd be interested to know what brought you to your conclusion.

Personally, I think I'm leaning toward the "high as a kite/murdered TB kind of by "accident"/panicked and killed HDB theory. The suggestion that TB might somehow be tied into DS's previous charges is interesting as well. JMHO.

BBM ~ This, IMO, seems to be the most logical theory. They both had criminal youths, although they were 5 years apart in age. Perhaps DS looked up to TB for something and something went sideways. Also, I am glad to read they are investigating Hanne Meketech. DS may have confided in TB that he was the killer and was scared he would kill again. :dunno:

 

[rogerrabbit]

....

JMO but my theory is DS went to Terry's house intending to kidnap Hailey for someone in the middle of the night but Terry woke up and there was a physical confrontation ending in Terry's murder.......
....Better for those involved to remain quiet because what's done is done, nothing will bring Hailey back kwim.
ALL JMO.

Snipped for space.

Wow, swedie - I have had nearly that exact same theory for quite a while now.

I wonder if we agree on the particular "someone" ? I'm thinking we might not.

But everyday that passes I'm retracting from that theory more and more as I just don't think that DS could be so loyal to the "someone" for this long and not name names.
As well as LE not having made any more arrests yet. You'd think if there was another "someone" involved, LE would have by now figured that out.

But if that theory is somewhat accurate, I certainly agree with you and the notion that it was poorly planned by DS....but I suppose one could argue that it was poorly executed. Either way I'm not buying into any theories labelling DS a seasoned criminal mastermind.

I guess with me becoming more and more skeptical of your theory (and my original theory), I'm now beginning to lean towards the theory of the motive being connected to DS's previous crimes and his upcoming (now passed) court date for those previous crimes.

And FWIW I really don't know what to think about the HM murder in Coleman.

ALL OPINIONS.

 

[Clouddippingdown]

<modsnip>

Kevin Dunbar mentioned in a Global interview that he moved his family away from the area of Blairmore to get away from all the badness there. When asked, what badness? He stated that the kids around there were in to drugs and bad things. What happened to Terry and his daughter cannot be classified simply as badness, it was treacherous and deceitful on an accelerated level and it's a long road from breaking and entering and theft to the abduction and murder of a young child. When I see the inclusion of a child on this level, especially in the manner of this presentation the first place I go is to the worst of the worst to rule out inclusion. I'm also putting credence on the statement that was released that the RCMP believed Terry's and Hailey's murders were planned; before it was retracted.

 

[Snowglobe]

<modsnip>

Kevin Dunbar mentioned in a Global interview that he moved his family away from the area of Blairmore to get away from all the badness there. When asked, what badness? He stated that the kids around there were in to drugs and bad things. What happened to Terry and his daughter cannot be classified simply as badness, it was treacherous and deceitful on an accelerated level and it's a long road from breaking and entering and theft to the abduction and murder of a young child. When I see the inclusion of a child on this level, especially in the manner of this presentation the first place I go is to the worst of the worst to rule out inclusion. I'm also putting credence on the statement that was released that the RCMP believed Terry's and Hailey's murders were planned; before it was retracted.[/QUOTE]

Bad things as in the MacDonald triad?

I think it is important to remember that one part of the triad is cruelty to animals. We know there is a history of that in the valley.

One of the three murders this month was a woman who adores animals.

LE believes there is a possibility all three murders are related. They all happened in a short time period, in close proximity. One murder happened next door to relatives of the accused.

I think it is important to consider all three lives taken, until this is ruled out.

 

[otto]

Let's look at what we know. Police have said that criminal act was premeditated. That suggests that the suspect had a plan. There was an antagonistic relationship between the suspect and father. There are two victims: one victim - father (child's protector) - is killed on the spot and left at the scene; the other - 2 year old child - is taken alive from the scene. The child is taken in a van to a location where the suspect can spend time with the 2 year old victim.

On the surface, this looks to be a premeditated abduction of a 2 year old child where the suspect wanted to spend time with the child. The father was most likely murdered because he tried to protect his daughter. I suspect that the child was sexually assaulted, and that sexual assault was the premeditated motive.

Are there any other facts that suggest something different?

 

[rogerrabbit]

.......

One of the three murders this month was a woman who adores animals.
........

^snipped for space

I'm sure most of us are pretty anxious to get some answers (if we actually do). But I find it hard to theorize that HM was targeted because she loved animals....but I suppose til we get some answers anything is a valid theory. JMO.

 

[Livvy]

Let's look at what we know. Police have said that criminal act was premeditated. That suggests that the suspect had a plan. There was an antagonistic relationship between the suspect and father. There are two victims: one victim - father (child's protector) - is killed on the spot and left at the scene; the other - 2 year old child - is taken alive from the scene. The child is taken in a van to a location where the suspect can spend time with the 2 year old victim.

On the surface, this looks to be a premeditated abduction of a 2 year old child where the suspect wanted to spend time with the child. The father was most likely murdered because he tried to protect his daughter. I suspect that the child was sexually assaulted, and that sexual assault was the premeditated motive.

Are there any other facts that suggest something different?

This is the only theory that makes sense to me as well. Although, I missed where police said it was premeditated. When was this?

 

[Hez]

Bad things as in the MacDonald triad?

I think it is important to remember that one part of the triad is cruelty to animals. We know there is a history of that in the valley.

One of the three murders this month was a woman who adores animals.

LE believes there is a possibility all three murders are related. They all happened in a short time period, in close proximity. One murder happened next door to relatives of the accused.

I think it is important to consider all three lives taken, until this is ruled out.

BBM - That is an inaccurate statement. They are investigating the possibility, which is logical given that DS's grandparents were her neighbours, but that doesn't mean they believe he was involved. The evidence will eventually lead them to or away from that conclusion. :moo:

RCMP say at this time they have no information to suggest the two cases are connected, but are exploring all possible angles.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2227871/r...tween-blairmore-murders-and-coleman-homicide/

 

[otto]

Bad things as in the MacDonald triad?

I think it is important to remember that one part of the triad is cruelty to animals. We know there is a history of that in the valley.

One of the three murders this month was a woman who adores animals.

LE believes there is a possibility all three murders are related. They all happened in a short time period, in close proximity. One murder happened next door to relatives of the accused.

I think it is important to consider all three lives taken, until this is ruled out.

Police know for a fact that two of the three recent murders are connected: Terry and his daughter. Last I read, police were looking into the possibility that the suspect in the two related murders is also responsible for the murder of the neighbour of the suspect's grandparents.

I think we can dismiss the notion of the MacDonald Triad. The theory from the 1960s has no substance.

"Some violent offenders do indeed have backgrounds that include fire setting, animal cruelty and bed wetting past the age of five years old. But rarely do these offenders have all three behaviors in their past, while, according to Psychology Today, other ones - like callous disregard for others - show up much more frequently. In addition, some of the data about the Macdonald Triad and its link to serial killers has seeped into public consciousness from novels and websites, written by authors who believe that the link has been indisputably proven.

Only recently have researchers begun to challenge the Macdonald Triad. In 2010, Kori Ryan published a thesis that performed the most extensive review of the triad to date and found that it was utterly inconclusive."

http://www.medicaldaily.com/macdona...ldhood-behaviors-predict-serial-killer-243106

"But subsequent attempts to replicate Hellman and Blackman's findings were unsuccessful. Even John Macdonald himself voiced later doubt about the triad's validity. After trying to test his own clinical theory, Macdonald reported in his 1968 book, Homicidal Threats, that he could find no statistically significant association between homicide perpetrators and early problems with firesetting, cruelty to animals, or enuresis."

http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.ca/2012/05/macdonald-triad-predictor-of-violence.html

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/witness/201205/homicidal-triad-predictor-violence-or-urban-myth