The Incinerator

[dizzy1]

I just wanted to post a link in regards to the train wreck tragedy in Lac Megantic. Many of the victims were burned, and the article explains how they go about identifying the many deceased.

A primary challenge will be locating human remains among the debris, which is largely all the same colour after being exposed to fire for such a long period, says Rogers.

"Because of the range of conditions that bodies may be found in, it takes a person with a lot of experience to differentiate between what might belong to a human from what is a piece of a building, for example," she says.

Inkster says that although many of the victims' remains will likely be severely damaged by the explosion and subsequent fire, it's exceedingly rare that investigators fail to find enough physical evidence to identify remains.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/07/09/f-forensic-identification-lac-megantic.html

 

[bessie]

Yes I do actually. While someone is deemed to be burned beyond recognition maybe they had a birth mark, mole or some type of disfigurement on any part of the body that had not been affected by burning. jmo Also maybe next of kin or other family member could identify boots or wristwatch or rings etc.

Speaking from experience, having to identify a family member that was in a very nasty car accident, LE usually have to get some kind of formal identification. For example when LE showed up at my home they asked me which car was being driven, asked me if said person was home or did I know their current whereabouts. I said that they were out in their car and that I did not know the exact location of them now, but that they should have been travelling on a certain road heading home.

Based on that information they proceeded to ask me to sit down..as they believed that the person had been killed in a car accident in their car. I was asked to take my time and call family to sit with me and that at some point during that day the body would need to be identified. This was a head on collision !!! So you can imagine, it was not a pretty sight.... I was not expected to just receive cremated boxed remains ! I had to somehow make an identification. I was told it had to be next of kin or an immediate family member if next of kin was not available (for example if they too had been in accident and unable to identify)

So IMO, it would make sense that SB was asked to at least identify whatever she could. Be it feet, hands, shoes, rings or a watch. I know its rather graphic to think about but the actual process of identifying someone you love very much is not exactly something out of Disney... JMO based on my own experience.

Had there been nothing to identify body wise due to extensive charring then the teeth would have been the way to go IMO...and SB would have needed to provide details of where his dental records were kept. However the short time it took to identify TB...leaves me wondering how this was done so quickly ....unless in fact SB had some part in the identification process or a close family member. JMO

In my loved ones case....The identifying of the body took place at the hospital where the body was taken...it had not yet gone to the Funeral Home as stated in a post above.... They do not know which Funeral Home to take it to, until the family decides where its going....and whether or not they wish for a burial or cremation. So IMO SB did have some input before she received that little box. She would have been the one to decide on a cremation or burial of the remains.....and may have been the one who identified any existing remains or personal effects...JMO

I'm terribly sorry you had that experience. I've had to identify deceased loved ones, myself, but under different circumstances, and it was still very difficult. As next of kin to two deceased family members who wished to be cremated, I had to do a visual ID before the process could take place. I was with both of them at their bedsides when they passed, but "viewing the body" under a sheet in a cold mortuary a day or two later is an altogether different experience. In addition, I was asked to identify a friend who died of a gunshot wound to the chest many years ago.

Also, like so many others from New Orleans and south Louisiana, I've had personal experience with many instances of drowning, and I've stood by the sides of two relatives and a close friend when their loved ones drowned. In all three cases, the bodies were in water long enough that a visual identification could not be made, or would have been extremely difficult. In the first case, the deceased's brother viewed the body at the morgue, but dental records were still used as confirmation. In the other two instances, no family member was asked to make a visual ID, but they were questioned extensively about personal effects like jewelry and clothing, as well as physical disctinctions such as history of surgeries, broken bones, injuries, scars, etc. And as with your loved one, location also was a factor. The data was used to make a preliminary identification which later was confirmed through dental records, and in the last case, DNA. So based on personal experience, and what I've learned from following so many cases on this board, I'm certain that a similar series of events occurred before SB received TB's remains.

I have to say that I'm taken aback by the often repeated suggestion that SB was simply handed a box and assured her husband's remains were inside. The other presumption is that LE made an announcement based on an on-the-spot identification, and that was the end of it. IMVHO, the announcement that TB's remains were found was based on a preliminary ID, through some combination of clothing, jewelry, teeth, dental/surgical hardware, and/or physical distinctions that were discernable even though facial features were not. Much of that information would have been obtained previously from family when TB went missing. There are many degrees of variation between "burned beyond recognition" and a "pile of ashes", and we don't know which one existed in this particular situation. Nor do we need to know all of the particulars in order to reach a logical conclusion. Yet, time and again the issue is debated, and it leaves me to wonder why the small group of intelligent posters participating regularly in the discussion cannot come to a consensus. Does anyone truly doubt that Tim Bosma is dead? Or suspect that a different person's remains were released to his family? Or is there another reason for perpetuating the debate?

 

[Blomquist]

MOO, but these allegations that LE would take a guess at who's body they were releasing to SB and family are totally unfounded. It is not up to LE to "complete the cremation", that is up to the family, and the funeral home. They would never make a positive identification of TB using "just clothing or something". Why would there be any "mention of SB being asked to complete the cremation", that would be between the funeral home and SB. And "formal ID'ing of the body by family"? MOO, but since TB's body was burned beyond recognition, he was not recognizable, so it would take the means of a professional to identify the remains via DNA, dental records, etc.

I did not say they took a guess at whose body it was... I was pointing out..maybe not clearly enough, that it would appear from many MSM reports that SB was given a box without having partaken in any of the ID process. If you read my lengthy post further down I clearly state that I believe SB would have been part of the ID process as per my own experience. There was no mention of her being asked to complete the cremation....meaning that no MSM reported anything other than she received a box....as did she (SB)

Maybe his face was not recognizable....but we have no idea if any other part was left ...with any identifiable marks, moles, etc. And as in my lengthy post I also say that if nothing was left to ID then the teeth would be the way to go.... The lengthy post of mine is quite explicit in what I think....so I do not think quoting my other post and then going on about what I didnt say in it, was the right thing to say/do JMO

 

[Blomquist]

I'm terribly sorry you had that experience. I've had to identify deceased loved ones, myself, but under different circumstances, and it was still very difficult. As next of kin to two deceased family members who wished to be cremated, I had to do a visual ID before the process could take place. I was with both of them at their bedsides when they passed, but "viewing the body" under a sheet in a cold mortuary a day or two later is an altogether different experience. In addition, I was asked to identify a friend who died of a gunshot wound to the chest many years ago.


I have to say that I'm taken aback by the often repeated suggestion that SB was simply handed a box and assured her husband's remains were inside. The other presumption is that LE made an announcement based on and on-the-spot identification, and that was the end of it. IMVHO, the announcement that TB's remains were found was based on a preliminary ID, through some combination of clothing, jewelry, teeth, dental/surgical hardware, and/or physical distinctions that were discernable even though facial features were not. Much of that information would have been obtained previously from family when TB went missing. There are many degrees of variation between "burned beyond recognition" and a "pile of ashes", and we don't know which one existed in this particular situation. Nor do we need to know all of the particulars in order to reach a logical conclusion. Yet, time and again the issue is debated, and it leaves me to wonder why the small group of intelligent posters participating regularly in the discussion cannot come to a consensus. Does anyone truly doubt that Tim Bosma is dead? Or suspect that a different person's remains were released to his family? Or is there another reason for perpetuating the debate?

Thank you for your condolences Bessie and mine to you on your loss also, thank you for taking time to acknowledge it..... I have no idea why the matter is perpetuated.... but when brought up I guess it becomes an issue and people post their opinions as with other issues. I agree that there was definitely more to it than being given a box.

I mean I didnt know TB and have no actual proof who exists and who doesn't in actual fact. But based on TV coverage and MSM I have been led to believe that he did exist and is now dead. Maybe the people who have more to say on the matter can weigh in as to why they perpetuate the debate?

 

[swanna]

I'm terribly sorry you had that experience. I've had to identify deceased loved ones, myself, but under different circumstances, and it was still very difficult. As next of kin to two deceased family members who wished to be cremated, I had to do a visual ID before the process could take place. I was with both of them at their bedsides when they passed, but "viewing the body" under a sheet in a cold mortuary a day or two later is an altogether different experience. In addition, I was asked to identify a friend who died of a gunshot wound to the chest many years ago.

Also, like so many others from New Orleans and south Louisiana, I've had personal experience with many instances of drowning, and I've stood by the sides of two relatives and a close friend when their loved ones drowned. In all three cases, the bodies were in water long enough that a visual identification could not be made, or would have been extremely difficult. In the first case, the deceased's brother viewed the body at the morgue, but dental records were still used as confirmation. In the other two instances, no family member was asked to make a visual ID, but they were questioned extensively about personal effects like jewelry and clothing, as well as physical disctinctions such as history of surgeries, broken bones, injuries, scars, etc. And as with your loved one, location also was a factor. The data was used to make a preliminary identification which later was confirmed through dental records, and in the last case, DNA. So based on personal experience, and what I've learned from following so many cases on this board, I'm certain that a similar series of events occurred before SB received TB's remains.

I have to say that I'm taken aback by the often repeated suggestion that SB was simply handed a box and assured her husband's remains were inside. The other presumption is that LE made an announcement based on and on-the-spot identification, and that was the end of it. IMVHO, the announcement that TB's remains were found was based on a preliminary ID, through some combination of clothing, jewelry, teeth, dental/surgical hardware, and/or physical distinctions that were discernable even though facial features were not. Much of that information would have been obtained previously from family when TB went missing. There are many degrees of variation between "burned beyond recognition" and a "pile of ashes", and we don't know which one existed in this particular situation. Nor do we need to know all of the particulars in order to reach a logical conclusion. Yet, time and again the issue is debated, and it leaves me to wonder why the small group of intelligent posters participating regularly in the discussion cannot come to a consensus. Does anyone truly doubt that Tim Bosma is dead? Or suspect that a different person's remains were released to his family? Or is there another reason for perpetuating the debate?

:gthanks: Bessie

 

[Alethea Dice]

I did not say they took a guess at whose body it was... I was pointing out..maybe not clearly enough, that it would appear from many MSM reports that SB was given a box without having partaken in any of the ID process. If you read my lengthy post further down I clearly states that I believe SB would have been part of the ID process as per my own experience. There was no mention of her being asked to complete the cremation....meaning that no MSM reported anything other than she received a box....as did she (SB)

Maybe his face was not recognizable....but we have no idea if any other part was left ...with any identifiable marks, moles, etc. And as in my lengthy post I also say that if nothing was left to ID then the teeth would be the way to go.... The lengthy post of mine is quite explicit in what I think....so I do not think quoting my other post and then going on about what I didnt say in it, was inaccurate JMO

I'm sorry you had to go though that experience, Blomquist. I had originally misunderstood, but I believe it started from Carli's post, not yours. Carli had since explained what she meant and the rest fell together for me.

I have no doubt that SB more than likely did have some involvement in the identification of the body as you describe, but I don't find that type of information is typically reported in MSM. I also think that, if there was still a body when TB was found, that she would have had some say in how it was returned (to the funeral home, not to her personally). I think her comment about getting a box was just that - a comment expressed from her grief and anger about what had happened. No one wants their loved one to come home in a box. We always hope that, when that time comes, there will still be something to say goodbye to.

JMO

 

[Blomquist]

I'm sorry you had to go though that experience, Blomquist. I had originally misunderstood, but I believe it started from Carli's post, not yours. Carli had since explained what she meant and the rest fell together for me.

I have no doubt that SB more than likely did have some involvement in the identification of the body as you describe, but I don't find that type of information is typically reported in MSM. I also think that, if there was still a body when TB was found, that she would have had some say in how it was returned (to the funeral home, not to her personally). I think her comment about getting a box was just that - a comment expressed from her grief and anger about what had happened. No one wants their loved one to come home in a box. We always hope that, when that time comes, there will still be something to say goodbye to.

JMO

Thank you.... even when you do get to say goodbye after death.... you are still saying goodbye to a shell in a box. The spirit is gone from the body either way.... and your loved one is no more. It is especially traumatic when the death is with a violent end...either by way of a murder or a violent crash...and the person no longer even looks familiar... thanks again for your post Alethea... it is very caring.

 

[Alethea Dice]

Thank you.... even when you do get to say goodbye after death.... you are still saying goodbye to a shell in a box. The spirit is gone from the body either way.... and your loved one is no more. It is especially traumatic when the death is with a violent end...either by way of a murder or a violent crash...and the person no longer even looks familiar... thanks again for your post Alethea... it is very caring.

I totally understand and agree 100%.

 

[2Hope4]

Shocked...just plain shocked! Just read through this thread, and I am having a very hard time figuring out WHY the incinerator was even purchased! I grew up on a farm, and run a farm now. NEVER did we have one. I didn't even realize they existed for the average person to purchase! We have a specific area on the farm that all animals are buried on. Horses, sheep, rabbits, chickens, turkey, dogs, cats, quail, all buried in this area. Doesn't take that long to bury them. Never ever thought about burning them! We also have the wild animals that get buried. Great Pyrenees is wonderful in protecting the livestock, and proudly displays this 'work' from during the night. Just can't see the expense of an incinerator when you have a tractor to do the deed. Blows my mind away!

I also know of a horse farm nearby, and they do burn their dead horses! It takes DAYS of burning to get the job done. One year we were under a fire burn ban, and I went trail riding on their property. The stench was overwhelming and I couldn't figure out what it was until I rode near the dead horse. It was terrible. I can say that even after days of buring, the large bones don't turn in ash. From what I've seen anyway. Guess hard to get an open fire burning hot enough to do that. Femurs, pelvis and heads just don't seem to burn like the rest of the horse does. To this day I don't know why they don't bury their horses! We don't have a back hoe but pay someone to come in and dig the hole for us for the horses. But that's just the way we operate and the horses are NOT really part of our farm, just pleasure horses. The other farm raises horses, trains them, leases them, does trail rides, riding lessons, etc. Nothing for them to have in excess of 100 horses at any given time.

I can understand if you've got a huge chicken farm for Perdue, or one of the others, where you raise them until 6 weeks or so, and they come pick them up for slaughter. Or you have the egg layers, and raise them. But even then, not likely you're losing 100 a day and thus require an incinerator! That would be money lost for the farmer and the chicken company! I'm just baffled, and shocked! Mind blowing!

Just to give an idea of the stench involved....yesterday I was out feeding, and gagging from the stench of what I knew was a dead animal somewhere. Found a chicken carcass, not much less of it, and my darn dogs rolled on it. Every one had to get a bath, while I gagged away. You could smell it as soon as going outside, but I didn't find it for quite awhile. It was in a field with tall grass at least 100 yards from the house. I kept going in circles because every time the wind blew, I thought I was close to finding it, but wasn't. Little roo has been buried now. The rest of the day I couldn't get that smell out of my nose though! A shower, and change of clothes and I could still smell it!!

Of course all my opinion because if you weren't with me, I can't back it up.

An incinerator on a farm with no animals...just baffling!!!!

 

[swedie]

I'm terribly sorry you had that experience. I've had to identify deceased loved ones, myself, but under different circumstances, and it was still very difficult. As next of kin to two deceased family members who wished to be cremated, I had to do a visual ID before the process could take place. I was with both of them at their bedsides when they passed, but "viewing the body" under a sheet in a cold mortuary a day or two later is an altogether different experience. In addition, I was asked to identify a friend who died of a gunshot wound to the chest many years ago.

Also, like so many others from New Orleans and south Louisiana, I've had personal experience with many instances of drowning, and I've stood by the sides of two relatives and a close friend when their loved ones drowned. In all three cases, the bodies were in water long enough that a visual identification could not be made, or would have been extremely difficult. In the first case, the deceased's brother viewed the body at the morgue, but dental records were still used as confirmation. In the other two instances, no family member was asked to make a visual ID, but they were questioned extensively about personal effects like jewelry and clothing, as well as physical disctinctions such as history of surgeries, broken bones, injuries, scars, etc. And as with your loved one, location also was a factor. The data was used to make a preliminary identification which later was confirmed through dental records, and in the last case, DNA. So based on personal experience, and what I've learned from following so many cases on this board, I'm certain that a similar series of events occurred before SB received TB's remains.

I have to say that I'm taken aback by the often repeated suggestion that SB was simply handed a box and assured her husband's remains were inside. The other presumption is that LE made an announcement based on and on-the-spot identification, and that was the end of it. IMVHO, the announcement that TB's remains were found was based on a preliminary ID, through some combination of clothing, jewelry, teeth, dental/surgical hardware, and/or physical distinctions that were discernable even though facial features were not. Much of that information would have been obtained previously from family when TB went missing. There are many degrees of variation between "burned beyond recognition" and a "pile of ashes", and we don't know which one existed in this particular situation. Nor do we need to know all of the particulars in order to reach a logical conclusion. Yet, time and again the issue is debated, and it leaves me to wonder why the small group of intelligent posters participating regularly in the discussion cannot come to a consensus. Does anyone truly doubt that Tim Bosma is dead? Or suspect that a different person's remains were released to his family? Or is there another reason for perpetuating the debate?

Thank you Bessie for your very logical and informative post. May I add this for further clarification as to the state in which TB was found. I hope this can put an end to the speculation as it's clearly states there was a BODY not just ashes as some speculate. I assume TB's remains would not have been released in time for the funeral service due to the fact, SB had decided to have his body cremated which of course takes scheduling and time after an autopsy. Sharlene was handed a BOX containing her husband's ashes. Not the way she intended to have Tim upon death. She wanted a hand to hold, a cheek to kiss goodbye. HTH and :moo:.

As police probe Laura’s disappearance they appear to be wrapping up the extensive ground search that followed the discovery of Bosma’s charred body. Police confirmed for the first time on Tuesday that his remains were found at the sprawling Waterloo farm purchased by Millard in May 2011. A spokesperson for the coroner’s office said Bosma’s body had not been released as of Tuesday afternoon. The remains will likely be absent at a funeral the family has scheduled for 11 a.m. Wednesday.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...wed_police_interest_in_her_disappearance.html

 

[Archangel7]

My 2 cents......... socially unrecognizable. It's pretty much that simple.
May it now rest in peace.

 

[swedie]

Shocked...just plain shocked! Just read through this thread, and I am having a very hard time figuring out WHY the incinerator was even purchased! I grew up on a farm, and run a farm now. NEVER did we have one. I didn't even realize they existed for the average person to purchase! We have a specific area on the farm that all animals are buried on. Horses, sheep, rabbits, chickens, turkey, dogs, cats, quail, all buried in this area. Doesn't take that long to bury them. Never ever thought about burning them! We also have the wild animals that get buried. Great Pyrenees is wonderful in protecting the livestock, and proudly displays this 'work' from during the night. Just can't see the expense of an incinerator when you have a tractor to do the deed. Blows my mind away!

I also know of a horse farm nearby, and they do burn their dead horses! It takes DAYS of burning to get the job done. One year we were under a fire burn ban, and I went trail riding on their property. The stench was overwhelming and I couldn't figure out what it was until I rode near the dead horse. It was terrible. I can say that even after days of buring, the large bones don't turn in ash. From what I've seen anyway. Guess hard to get an open fire burning hot enough to do that. Femurs, pelvis and heads just don't seem to burn like the rest of the horse does. To this day I don't know why they don't bury their horses! We don't have a back hoe but pay someone to come in and dig the hole for us for the horses. But that's just the way we operate and the horses are NOT really part of our farm, just pleasure horses. The other farm raises horses, trains them, leases them, does trail rides, riding lessons, etc. Nothing for them to have in excess of 100 horses at any given time.

I can understand if you've got a huge chicken farm for Perdue, or one of the others, where you raise them until 6 weeks or so, and they come pick them up for slaughter. Or you have the egg layers, and raise them. But even then, not likely you're losing 100 a day and thus require an incinerator! That would be money lost for the farmer and the chicken company! I'm just baffled, and shocked! Mind blowing!

Just to give an idea of the stench involved....yesterday I was out feeding, and gagging from the stench of what I knew was a dead animal somewhere. Found a chicken carcass, not much less of it, and my darn dogs rolled on it. Every one had to get a bath, while I gagged away. You could smell it as soon as going outside, but I didn't find it for quite awhile. It was in a field with tall grass at least 100 yards from the house. I kept going in circles because every time the wind blew, I thought I was close to finding it, but wasn't. Little roo has been buried now. The rest of the day I couldn't get that smell out of my nose though! A shower, and change of clothes and I could still smell it!!

Of course all my opinion because if you weren't with me, I can't back it up.

An incinerator on a farm with no animals...just baffling!!!!

:welcome4: 2Hope4! Thank you for your personal experience and helpful information. According to scientific findings, the body is made up of mostly water/fluid; anywhere from 50 to 75%. Would stand to reason as you mentioned the burning process would take days. Regardless of temperature, it is more difficult and a longer process to burn water/fluids.

So with that in mind, let's say hypothetically, IF LB had been disposed of this way (incinerator), there may be evidence remaining in the incinerator such as bigger bone, teeth. IF TB was not found in the incinerator, but LE still hauled it away, it's very telling there was some sort of remnants found in the incinerator they felt the need to test. Otherwise if TB was found in the field, or a barrel, why bother carting the incinerator away? As you mentioned about carcasses taking days to burn, I imagine it would take a great deal of propane to run it for days. This leads me to consider; did they use most of the propane disposing of other "things", and did not realize, leaving them no other option to dispose of evidence then to burn TB in a barrel or on the ground? Even just to burn outer layers they believe would distort ID and evidence, JMO.

IIRC AD posted with her opinion as to LB's and WM's cases being separate cases. That very well could be a fact, but I am certain if they are, we will not be privy to the findings until after TB's case is over with. The reason behind that would be to protect the information regarding the outcome of LB's and WM's investigation, to give DM a fair trial on TB's case. Any information regarding LB or WM could taint a jury if it is found DM was responsible for either or those murders. IF it is found DM was responsible for two or more of TB's, LB's and WM's death, he will certainly spend the rest of his life in prison. He will be classified, no doubt in my mind, a dangerous offender. HTH and :moo:

 

[cansleuther]

That very well could be a fact, but I am certain if they are, we will not be privy to the findings until after TB's case is over with. The reason behind that would be to protect the information regarding the outcome of LB's and WM's investigation, to give DM a fair trial on TB's case. Any information regarding LB or WM could taint a jury if it is found DM was responsible for either or those murders. IF it is found DM was responsible for two or more of TB's, LB's and WM's death, he will certainly spend the rest of his life in prison.

LB is still classified as a missing person, NOT a homicide. Her family has said on more than one occasion that they have every reason to believe she is still alive and IMO they would have been given more information than what has been published in MSM.

 

[Snoofo]

Welcome 2hope4 and thanks for your input of personal experience, that is always helpful especially when described so thoroughly. I almost started gagging myself in sympathy when you told the chicken-dog story!

I would imagine there was an associated smell and noise if the deed took place at the farm and LE would have strong evidence or witness statements in that regard.

 

[Arnie M]

Anyone else consider the incinerator was going to be used as a crematorium for dogs and animals put down at animal shelters , Or as a crematorium for peoples pets ? Cremating pets has become a popular businesses in the past few years , and dog pounds always have a lot of "bodies" to dispose of.

Could this have been one of WM's previous ideas that DM was implementing ... WM was always involved in animal rights causes and pet shelters. Something to consider.

Also ... I know a lot of farmers who have to pay to have dead livestock hauled away (to rendering plants) .... they used to bury them on the farms but in some areas laws are changing (contaminating groundwater) .... now they pile the carcases up (rotting stink piles) and once a week the rendering truck hauls it away

A local incinerator service would be a good business in farming country. Also Highway depts have daily road kill to dispose of .... at one time they were taken to the landfill but environment laws are getting restrictive .... besides isn't a lot of Ontario Garbage now hauled to the USA for disposal ?

Just some thoughts on reasons someone would purchase an incinerator for business reasons .... but it would be burning day and night to keep up with the volume and demand ... and by the sounds of it DM was not very interested in doing much work at the best of times.

If none of the above applies to DM buying an incinerator , it would suggest he was going to use it to eliminate "human" remains for criminal reasons .... bizarre thought , but not impossible ... big demand for those "services" as well. Leaves minimum evidence.

My best guess is that it was purchased for nefarious reasons because the machine was used shortly after the abduction of TB (indicates pre-planning )

 

[Alethea Dice]

Anyone else consider the incinerator was going to be used as a crematorium for dogs and animals put down at animal shelters , Or as a crematorium for peoples pets ? Cremating pets has become a popular businesses in the past few years , and dog pounds always have a lot of "bodies" to dispose of.

Could this have been one of WM's previous ideas that DM was implementing ... WM was always involved in animal rights causes and pet shelters. Something to consider.

Also ... I know a lot of farmers who have to pay to have dead livestock hauled away (to rendering plants) .... they used to bury them on the farms but in some areas laws are changing (contaminating groundwater) .... now they pile the carcases up (rotting stink piles) and once a week the rendering truck hauls it away

A local incinerator service would be a good business in farming country. Also Highway depts have daily road kill to dispose of .... at one time they were taken to the landfill but environment laws are getting restrictive .... besides isn't a lot of Ontario Garbage now hauled to the USA for disposal ?

Just some thoughts on reasons someone would purchase an incinerator for business reasons .... but it would be burning day and night to keep up with the volume and demand ... and by the sounds of it DM was not very interested in doing much work at the best of times.

If none of the above applies to DM buying an incinerator , it would suggest he was going to use it to eliminate "human" remains for criminal reasons .... bizarre thought , but not impossible ... big demand for those "services" as well. Leaves minimum evidence.

My best guess is that it was purchased for nefarious reasons because the machine was used shortly after the abduction of TB (indicates pre-planning )

Do you have a link for when the incinerator was actually used? Please and thanks.

 

[Snoofo]

Anyone else consider the incinerator was going to be used as a crematorium for dogs and animals put down at animal shelters , Or as a crematorium for peoples pets ? Cremating pets has become a popular businesses in the past few years , and dog pounds always have a lot of "bodies" to dispose of.

Could this have been one of WM's previous ideas that DM was implementing ... WM was always involved in animal rights causes and pet shelters. Something to consider.

Also ... I know a lot of farmers who have to pay to have dead livestock hauled away (to rendering plants) .... they used to bury them on the farms but in some areas laws are changing (contaminating groundwater) .... now they pile the carcases up (rotting stink piles) and once a week the rendering truck hauls it away

A local incinerator service would be a good business in farming country. Also Highway depts have daily road kill to dispose of .... at one time they were taken to the landfill but environment laws are getting restrictive .... besides isn't a lot of Ontario Garbage now hauled to the USA for disposal ?

Just some thoughts on reasons someone would purchase an incinerator for business reasons .... but it would be burning day and night to keep up with the volume and demand ... and by the sounds of it DM was not very interested in doing much work at the best of times.

If none of the above applies to DM buying an incinerator , it would suggest he was going to use it to eliminate "human" remains for criminal reasons .... bizarre thought , but not impossible ... big demand for those "services" as well. Leaves minimum evidence.

My best guess is that it was purchased for nefarious reasons because the machine was used shortly after the abduction of TB (indicates pre-planning )

Hi Arnie and welcome to this forum!
Thanks for sharing your ideas. We shall wait with great interest for the proceedings to begin.

<modsnip>


Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[Juballee]

Anyone else consider the incinerator was going to be used as a crematorium for dogs and animals put down at animal shelters , Or as a crematorium for peoples pets ? Cremating pets has become a popular businesses in the past few years , and dog pounds always have a lot of "bodies" to dispose of.

Could this have been one of WM's previous ideas that DM was implementing ... WM was always involved in animal rights causes and pet shelters. Something to consider.

Also ... I know a lot of farmers who have to pay to have dead livestock hauled away (to rendering plants) .... they used to bury them on the farms but in some areas laws are changing (contaminating groundwater) .... now they pile the carcases up (rotting stink piles) and once a week the rendering truck hauls it away

A local incinerator service would be a good business in farming country. Also Highway depts have daily road kill to dispose of .... at one time they were taken to the landfill but environment laws are getting restrictive .... besides isn't a lot of Ontario Garbage now hauled to the USA for disposal ?

Just some thoughts on reasons someone would purchase an incinerator for business reasons .... but it would be burning day and night to keep up with the volume and demand ... and by the sounds of it DM was not very interested in doing much work at the best of times.

If none of the above applies to DM buying an incinerator , it would suggest he was going to use it to eliminate "human" remains for criminal reasons .... bizarre thought , but not impossible ... big demand for those "services" as well. Leaves minimum evidence.

My best guess is that it was purchased for nefarious reasons because the machine was used shortly after the abduction of TB (indicates pre-planning )

Hi Arnie and welcome. I actually put forth the same idea some time ago that it could be used to cremate small animals because it was posted that his uncle either runs or works at an animal clinic, or as a private business because pet cremation is so outrageously expensive, or that it could have possibly been bought to dispose of the 'road kill' of the skies when they were preparing to repair planes at the hanger. I like your idea about it possibly being tied to one of WM's charities, a lot of old ideas get twisted and repackaged, so it's refreshing to hear some new ideas, and I personally appreciate seeing another new open mind in the forum. I wonder if perhaps it could have been involved a charity to help shelters or even lower income families cremate the remains of beloved pets when they cannot afford outside services? It is an interesting angle that I don't think has been approached yet.

But the truth is we don't know what it was bought for, although we have learned that it was bought by an employee, so perhaps that employee was the one who had nefarious plans. Also, we don't know that LB was abducted, but her parents seem to strongly believe that she left from what I can gather and that she will return home when she is ready, and I hope and pray that they are right. From what I recall, her parents had nothing but nice things to say about DM, even before it was announced that he wasn't the last person to contact her. The point is, that if my neighbour went missing last month, and I also bought a chain saw last month, and I have no trees, does that mean I murdered my neighbour? Maybe I took up ice carving, or want to learn to juggle them.

You are right, he could have been doing other things with it that we haven't even guessed at, for all we know he bought it to dispose of the rotting animals his dog kept rolling in. (I am half joking here, because I fully remember the the way my country dog had to roll in every smelly carcass or turd pile he encountered, thank you for posting that 2hope4, it brought back some memories!)

 

[robynhood]

the incinerator may I remind you costs $15,ooo....that is very expensive to cremate animals when most animal rescue groups are Against killing....written loudly in there Goal statements ...they recue animals avoid ont human societies who KIll them...euthanize than...I worked as a volunteer rescue feral kittens....The last thing North Toronto cat recue wanted to hear was animals being KILLED!....Jubaloee...you were the first person who asked me and stated when Bessie posted NO FARMS OR AIRPOSTS in Canada require BY LAAW THAT AN INCIDERATOR be on their property ....now you stated again post #718 (above)......

"Hi Arnie and welcome. I actually put forth the same idea some time ago that it could be used to cremate small animals because it was posted that his uncle either runs or works at an animal clinic, or as a private business because pet cremation is so outrageously expensive, or that it could have possibly been bought to dispose of the 'road kill' of the skies when they were preparing to repair planes at the hanger. I like your idea about it possibly being tied to one of WM's charities, a lot of old ideas get twisted and repackaged, so it's refreshing to hear some new ideas, and I personally appreciate seeing another new open mind in the forum."..quoted Jubalee.... you asked me where you said planes and road KILL" ..robynhood!

 

[Arnie M]

But the truth is we don't know what it was bought for, although we have learned that it was bought by an employee, so perhaps that employee was the one who had nefarious plans.

When a person (family) owns a corporation all equipment , tools , supplies , vehicles , fuel, repairs etc will be purchased thru the corporation so that would be considered normal

DM would simply instruct his company purchasing agent to acquire the needed equipment (incinerator) , a couple of phone calls to the Manitoba distributor and it would be on the way. DW wouldnt even have to open his wallet or do anything except maybe sign his own company purchase order as an internal policy requirement.

When owners of corporations use vehicles for personal or recreational purposes the year end accounting will put that (usually small) portion of use into the column of personal income tax (of the user) ... the greater part of the cost is born by the corporation and is a corporate expense taxwise

I would still be curious what DM would have told his staff the reason for an incinerator ... I am sure the question would have come up .... not many aviator-car-guys have a need for a crematorium .

best wishes
AM