Snively
Ontario Cold Cases - The Podcast
Just trying to help you out with basic logic.
CANADA Canada - Elizabeth Bain, 22, Scarborough Ont, 19 June 1990 #1
- Thread starter Patience
- Start date
- Status
Just trying to help you out with basic logic.
With all due respect - where is the logic on 'intermittent waves'? Never heard of that being a problem with Bell in a home with more than one cordless or non-cordless phone. Have had many phones over the years, including 1990 in Ontario.
What other provider could we be talking about, that might have had that techie problem?
What other provider could we be talking about, that might have had that techie problem?
Snively
Ontario Cold Cases - The Podcast
Seriously? There was limited bandwidth then compared to now, with very basic radio technology compared to today. Those old cordless phone calls could be picked up with a cheap scanner from Radio Shack. Even cell phone calls back then could. Now if you have a even a cordless door bell if there are more than a few in an area they all go off if a doorbell is pushed three days away. Cordless phones today still cut out if you walk too far from a base station. If the base station has any problem with a power boost or loss they can do about anything. If there was a problem with the line coming in there could be a problem. Still happens to this day. And these are digital phones on a far better bandwidth. The one's in 1990 were analog. Does your wireless internet cut out occasionally? Your cell phone get lousy reception in certain areas?
This is another indication that RB was truthful in everything he said for the 19th. I recall LE trying to label RB in a lie that the line was busy because they had in fact had call waiting so the line would not have been busy therefore RB was lying that he actually tried to call.
However another proven truth on RBs part. One would assume RB knew they had call waiting therefor it would be futile to actually say it was a busy signal if it wasn't. He would have said it rang but no one answered.
Question is was there actually a problem with the line or was someone on it for the whole time talking to daddy dearest about something and how to handle it. Idk jmo
And I owned three cordless phones back then too and lines did mess up, even if one person didn't hang up properly it could cause a busy signal if no one was aware of it.
However I think woodland has a good question, why the detailed reasoning for it. Was he trying to make an excuse to hide the fact that maybe someone was on it for all that time maybe and he didn't want that to be known for some reason. Just speculating of course
With all due respect Snively, can you tell us about 'intermittent waves' in 1990 in Scarborough? Jumping from one era to another doesn't answer the original query. Must dismiss what you have answered - but that's just me.
Agreed eyesonly - why did daddy dearest take it upon himself to explain the phone situation on a night he was out of the country? Why would he feel he had to make an excuse or give an explanation? How would he know he 'needed' to explain the busy signal on the phone. Who said it was continuous between 8:00 and 11:00 pm? Only daddy. Leaning towards 'damage control', which would require a reason.
Also - the 'intermittent wave' explanation is lame - imo.
Agreed eyesonly - why did daddy dearest take it upon himself to explain the phone situation on a night he was out of the country? Why would he feel he had to make an excuse or give an explanation? How would he know he 'needed' to explain the busy signal on the phone. Who said it was continuous between 8:00 and 11:00 pm? Only daddy. Leaning towards 'damage control', which would require a reason.
Also - the 'intermittent wave' explanation is lame - imo.
SecretSource
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2014
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
Christopher Hitchens was perhaps her greatest detractor; he made a decent living at it for a while and wrote a book about it before he decided to take on all of religion and not just Catholicism.
Snively
Ontario Cold Cases - The Podcast
Don't worry there are no intermittent waves getting through your tin foil hat Woodland.
SecretSource
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2014
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
It is EGen; it bears repeating that EGos is absolutely irrelevant to this case. Mrs B knew that EGen was still marginally in the picture so when RB was out of the house she took Officer Stinson aside and told him that she thought there was a possibility that EB might be at EG's home; likely just a guess but certainly confirmation that Mrs B knew EGen was still in the picture.
SecretSource
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2014
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
You're not alone in that RB's lawyers did pursue MB as a suspect when NS decided to use her platform as a witness at the 1992 to start slagging MB. If you read the transcripts it is clear that NS had some serious latent resentment toward MB and felt he could be quite rude, angry, chauvinistic and inconsiderate. Not smart for any defence lawyer to insinuate that the victim's brother might have been involved but the fact remains that as unlikely as it is there is still no definitive proof as to his whereabouts that night, some men would not take kindly to their sisters interfering in their personal affairs and MB did not participate in a single search for his sister, which any way you look at it is just plain strange.
SecretSource
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2014
- Messages
- 95
- Reaction score
- 0
There is some ambiguity there. Mrs. B testified that RB was EB's first "serious" boyfriend and several family members told RB the same thing at Christmas 1989; RB certainly got that impression given that her extended family had never been introduced to anyone by EB as a boyfriend. EB had told RB that she and EGen had once been an item and EG confirmed this with RB post-disappearance, though there was some dispute as to how long EB and EGen had dated as well but it doesn't seem to have been that long.
With all due respect - 'night' is an assumption made by LE - we and LE don't know anything about timing.
Actually it's not an assumption. The "night" refers to mb's whereabouts and secretsource is absolutely correct, there is no definitive proof on mb's whereabouts the evening of the 19th.
Though I could give a good theory on that, which I can do later today when I get home and check my notes on that subject
ok so here's the mb stuff;
it was testified that he had class till 10pm that night, LE was not able to confirm that, RB saw mb's car at the bain house at 915pm. Mrs bain testified that "mark was not home that night". MB's gf told JS (from the book who married the aunt after he started helping the bains in the search for their daughter)
that MB got to her house that night (june 19th ) at 830pm, which is just after the 3r sighting of liz and her car and you can easily walk to her place from the 3r, it would be just south of the bus stop that the 3r sighting lady got off the bus at. His gf tells JS that he stayed there for about and hour and a half but RB sees his car in the bain driveway at 915pm. MB leaves his gf house according to her at 10pm, the time his class would have been done according to MB's testimony, and MB says he got home at 1015pm, the same time he would get home from his gfs. if he were walking.
MB's gf tells JS that MB didn't stay at her place that night, however she also tells him that mr bain had been calling their house at around 2am in the morning several times to remind them that MB in fact did stay there that night.
I believe it was mrs bain testimony, maybe pre-trial, that she says MB came home the morning of the 20th at 6am. He was not home that night.
Maybe MB is responsible for the whole thing, but there is reason to believe if he was the person seen with liz in the car on the 401 and at the 3r auto, that he may not have been the one responsible for her disappearance. that theory is presently being worked on.
and he may have had nothing at all to do with it, but if so, why lie about where he was, and why lie on the stand. what was he really doing that night.
all jmo
it was testified that he had class till 10pm that night, LE was not able to confirm that, RB saw mb's car at the bain house at 915pm. Mrs bain testified that "mark was not home that night". MB's gf told JS (from the book who married the aunt after he started helping the bains in the search for their daughter)
that MB got to her house that night (june 19th ) at 830pm, which is just after the 3r sighting of liz and her car and you can easily walk to her place from the 3r, it would be just south of the bus stop that the 3r sighting lady got off the bus at. His gf tells JS that he stayed there for about and hour and a half but RB sees his car in the bain driveway at 915pm. MB leaves his gf house according to her at 10pm, the time his class would have been done according to MB's testimony, and MB says he got home at 1015pm, the same time he would get home from his gfs. if he were walking.
MB's gf tells JS that MB didn't stay at her place that night, however she also tells him that mr bain had been calling their house at around 2am in the morning several times to remind them that MB in fact did stay there that night.
I believe it was mrs bain testimony, maybe pre-trial, that she says MB came home the morning of the 20th at 6am. He was not home that night.
Maybe MB is responsible for the whole thing, but there is reason to believe if he was the person seen with liz in the car on the 401 and at the 3r auto, that he may not have been the one responsible for her disappearance. that theory is presently being worked on.
and he may have had nothing at all to do with it, but if so, why lie about where he was, and why lie on the stand. what was he really doing that night.
all jmo
Let's break MB down into separate posts - what various people had to say about him on the night of 19 June and the morning of 10 June 1990.
MB testified he was at a class at the same campus his sister attended until 10:00 pm on 19 June 1990.
LE could not or did not confirm that.
Missing - what did MB testify to regarding his movements after class that night?
MB testified he was at a class at the same campus his sister attended until 10:00 pm on 19 June 1990.
LE could not or did not confirm that.
Missing - what did MB testify to regarding his movements after class that night?
Mrs B said her son MB 'was not home that night'.
Now does that mean the evening of 19 June, or all night - up to when the sun came up on 20 June 1990? Did he come home before going to work on the morning of 20 June 1990? He did go to work on the morning of 20 June 1990, for the landscaping company he was working for - and he went to Markham.
Here is what needs to be answered - Mrs B called RB at 6:30 am 20 June 1990 asking if EB was there as she had not come home during the night. RB was at the Bain residence 30 minutes later and was looking in EB's room for phone numbers etc. MB called home at that time. RB could not hear the conversation MB had with his mother. RB got on the phone with MB and asked what AC's address was (EB had told RB she was having dinner with AC the night of 19 June 1990 and would not see him, which turned out to be untrue, according to AC. EB told RB about this dinner date twice).
So MB knew his sister did not come home the night before. How did he know that? Exactly how did he know that?
Now does that mean the evening of 19 June, or all night - up to when the sun came up on 20 June 1990? Did he come home before going to work on the morning of 20 June 1990? He did go to work on the morning of 20 June 1990, for the landscaping company he was working for - and he went to Markham.
Here is what needs to be answered - Mrs B called RB at 6:30 am 20 June 1990 asking if EB was there as she had not come home during the night. RB was at the Bain residence 30 minutes later and was looking in EB's room for phone numbers etc. MB called home at that time. RB could not hear the conversation MB had with his mother. RB got on the phone with MB and asked what AC's address was (EB had told RB she was having dinner with AC the night of 19 June 1990 and would not see him, which turned out to be untrue, according to AC. EB told RB about this dinner date twice).
So MB knew his sister did not come home the night before. How did he know that? Exactly how did he know that?
MB's gf, NS, said he got to her house around 8:30 pm on the night of 19 June 1990. She said this to the future uncle of EB, who was looking into the case. NS lives within walking distance of 3R - where EB's car was found on the afternoon of 22 June 1990.
NS said MB stayed until 10:00 pm or so and left, and that he did not spend the night.
What did NS say MB was driving? Or did she say what MB was driving?
It's not really a 'stroll' from the Bain residence to the NS residence. Why would MB stroll there anyway? He had a vehicle. He had to work the next morning and it was late - whether he stayed or not, or whether he arrived after class or not.
Why did Mr Bain feel it necessary to remind NS, at 2:30 am on some morning later (if true) that MB had spent the night of 19 - 20 June 1990 at her house?
Note - I see you have posted that Mrs B testified MB came home at 6:00 am the morning of 20 June 1990 (alluding to her son had spent the night at the NS residence) - before going to work that morning in Markham. Is this correct or do you just 'believe' Mrs B testified to that at pre-trial?
Did NS testify? What did she say at trial? Did it differ from what she told the future uncle of EB?
NS said MB stayed until 10:00 pm or so and left, and that he did not spend the night.
What did NS say MB was driving? Or did she say what MB was driving?
It's not really a 'stroll' from the Bain residence to the NS residence. Why would MB stroll there anyway? He had a vehicle. He had to work the next morning and it was late - whether he stayed or not, or whether he arrived after class or not.
Why did Mr Bain feel it necessary to remind NS, at 2:30 am on some morning later (if true) that MB had spent the night of 19 - 20 June 1990 at her house?
Note - I see you have posted that Mrs B testified MB came home at 6:00 am the morning of 20 June 1990 (alluding to her son had spent the night at the NS residence) - before going to work that morning in Markham. Is this correct or do you just 'believe' Mrs B testified to that at pre-trial?
Did NS testify? What did she say at trial? Did it differ from what she told the future uncle of EB?
RB said, when he got to the Bain residence after 9:15 pm on 19 June 1990, he saw MB's vehicle in the driveway.
EB's car, according to RB, was no longer in the lot where he had seen it earlier just before going to the Bain residence. It's the reason he said he went to the Bain residence looking for EB.
EB's car, according to RB, was no longer in the lot where he had seen it earlier just before going to the Bain residence. It's the reason he said he went to the Bain residence looking for EB.
What was the date and time on the parking ticket in the back of EB's car when it was found on 22 June 1990? According to NCTM it had the address of the NS residence on it.
Someone has to know what the date and time was. It might have been dropped from public view, but someone knows that info.
Someone has to know what the date and time was. It might have been dropped from public view, but someone knows that info.
Sure can, let me know when the exercise is finished please, till then good luck
- Status