I think the picnic area is where the neighbours took a photo of the incinerator and the ground was scorched, and it was later moved (because there were references to where it was originally, etc.) LE set up two tents at the farm: one by the picnic area and one further back that seems to have been set up smack dab in the center of the lot vs. the property line. So somebody was doing something pretty deep into the lot...the center, innermost part of it.
If the neighbours photographed it in the picnic area, but then it was moved, then it must have been moved after Friday, when the picture was taken, so it was either moved by LE or an accomplice. I am not sure if LE would have moved it all the way to the middle of the property just to see what may have been under it. To me I don't think that explains the original position comment, I think the neighbours saw it on one of their likely somewhat regular strolls through the property, perhaps when they were there taking pictures of the digger stuck in the mud. Many posters have said that just owning the incinerator means it was obviously for nefarious purposes only, yet the neighbours didn't think it was out of place enough to report it as suspicious, if they had in fact seen it before, in it's 'original' position, in my opinion.
Neighbours reported the barn falling apart since DM bought the property, so perhaps there were enough missing planks to give a casual observer the chance to see something in there. Perhaps DM would not be assured that someone at the hanger would not go in the trailer. I really doubt he told his buddies that he had this extremely hot truck on his hands. This is just not the sort of news you share. DM had to put the truck and the trailer somewhere, the barn was out, the hangar was out, and MB's driveway was the least out of place place to park that trailer...???
I think that if they were expecting casual observers, that they wouldn't have hidden a body and an incinerator there. I do not agree with the suggestion that he might have thought he had more control over who might see it in his mothers driveway on a suburban residential street instead of the hanger or farm.
And again, I maintain, that it is an unnecessary risk to move the truck from someplace that you already think is a good enough hiding place for an incinerator and a body to somewhere where neighbours up and down the street would wonder why MB had a huge trailer in her driveway. Every mile that the truck was moved increased its chances of being discovered exponentially, who would take that chance when they could have just left in in the trailer anywhere on the farm and had less chance of discovery? Do we really think nosy country neighbours are bold enough to break the lock on a trailer and peek inside out of curiosity? I don't think that the truck was moved to keep it hidden, personally.
How about, if you dispose of evidence in multiple places there is a higher chance of one piece being found. However if you dispose of evidence together, you're more likely to have a case/charges against you if that one pile is found. One piece of evidence does not make a case, and if you make it as hard as possible to find all the pieces and put them together...
To me, the idea that if LE found the truck without the body or the body without the truck it would be fine, but the two together are not fine, makes no sense. In my opinion, LE are smart enough to search all the other places tied to a suspect if the find something horribly incriminating in one place tied to them, so spreading it out defeats the purpose. The evidence is apparently the same whether it is found in one place or many, but in my opinion, it makes someone look far more guilty to have it in two places tied to one person and none tied to the other suspect, then to have it all in one place, where they can say that someone just dumped it all there.
I think you would have to put the whole truck and trailer in the storage locker because you would want the truck under wraps in public. There definitely are security cameras at public storage. That may not have been cheap or convenient to arrange.
Although both a storage locker and MB's house are able to be seen by the public at random, I personally think that a storage locker is more private because firstly they usually have a good gate around the building that keeps all but those who have an access code out, people are often alone in the section they are in at any given time, and there are large ones you can drive a truck or trailer right into and then you have the privacy to keep whatever you want behind an anonymous closed door. I imagine that they are fairly easy to rent with a false name as well. To me that still seems more private than a street full of houses.
I think the idea that it might not have been cheap enough is humorous, and the idea that it may not have been easier than transporting it all the way to Kleinburg just doesn't make sense to me either, no offense.
MS (and #3, if applicable) always have a right to say DM, I don't want you or your truck problem at my home. And DM doesn't want it at his home either...or the hangar where there are too many people...or any place with cameras...I guess he came up with mom's?
Why do we assume it is DM's truck problem? He is the one with the least motive and no criminal history. Honestly, to me this still sounds like he is being made to be a patsy.
