CANADA Canada - Audrey Gleave, 73, Ancaster ON, 30 Dec 2010 #2

[No_Stone_Unturned]

I imagine December would be a busy time for visiting relatives or university students on holiday ..

Indeed! But I would think (hope) that LE has investigated all young people who came home for the Christmas holidays!

In fact, it could also be a high school student. Late high school, ages 17 - 19.

 

[Missizzy]

A few thoughts, in no particular order.

In early articles, at least one young college aged man (other than our poster, PK) was interviewed as he and his family lived close. I believe it was his mother who received the email. He was named and quoted in the early articles. Initials, CF.

I don't recall hearing the time of day that LV delivered soup. I always assumed lunch-time-ish but correct me if it was reported differently.

ITA that there is a strange disconnect about the lunch gathering. Was she trying to mislead someone? Is "going to coffee" some sort of code?

I simply don't understand how LE could say so definitively and so immediately that this horrific crime was committed by a stranger and at the same time not ring the bells about safety in the community. IMO, a stranger simply does not kill with this level of rage WITH a sexual component unless they are a serial killer/rapist.

The visit to the vet's house was reported as taking place at two different times so I'm not sure when she had last left the house--the vet's, LV's--I'm not clear.

Has PK ever told us how often Ms. Gleave typically emailed him? Was it normal to get frequent emails?

The use of the pseudonym, Bary, makes me think she was terrified of being found and yet she'd been in the same spot since birth. How could all these local folks not have known about her past in the area? Both the names, Bary and Otte can be either male or female. I seem to remember LV calling her Audrey but PK called her Aud (per the new article) or Bary. I have to wonder what her official ID says. I seem to remember her either cutting off contact or threatening to with her former brother-in-law for forwarding an email from her.

Why would she mislead so many people about so many diverse elements of her life? Is this why we kept hearing over and over that she was "unique", "special", "very very private"?

 

[Missizzy]

Why are we hearing "Look young and look close" nine months after the murder?

 

[Missizzy]

I've been going back over the article to see if I missed anything. I checked out the addresses and it seems that the Doveika family moved to increasingly nicer homes. It's reported that her father was a heavy drinker and that she rarely even spoke to her mother. I have to wonder if her father ever hurt her and she blamed her mother. I found this confusing:


"....At 23, Audrey worked as a clerk at Bell, and in 1964 was enrolled in science at McMaster University. In first year at McMaster she met AG, who was six years her junior and studying engineering. [He] had attended Hill Park Secondary School, his father was a purchasing agent for Firestone, and his uncle, also named AG, was a Hamilton police officer...."


Does anyone else find it surprising that such a brilliant young woman would wait until age 27 to start college? That's how old she would have been in 1964 as she was born in 1937. AG described her as "fun and smart". But what had she done with that intelligence? Most highly intelligent girls don't choose to marry at 16. That marriage didn't last long so what did she do from the time of the first marriage until she married again sometime in her 20s and worked as a clerk, prior to entering college? Somehow, it just doesn't fit for me. She'd obviously been interested in science since childhood, thus the book with the name Otte Wilma in it which her 3rd husband found. I find it almost unbelievable that she'd be able to stay away from the college with her mind. Being that she married at 16, it's not even clear that she finished high school with her class, unless she finished early, at a very young age. What was this woman doing with that mind of hers? She was fun, that's not up for debate, as she did attract three husbands.

Where did she get the premonition that she'd be raped and murdered in her home? This is something that she told her brother-in-law, seemingly much later--after her third divorce. Did one of her husbands or lovers threaten her or frighten her? It's interesting to note that only a cat was mentioned as a pet in her earlier years. A cat certainly couldn't protect her as two large dogs. What precipitated this premonition? But her fears and secrecy seemed to start decades prior to the sharing of that premonition.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Why are we hearing "Look young and look close" nine months after the murder?

Good question! The only thing I can think of is that it's Fall this week and therefore we'll be coming to the Christmas season before we know it. Perhaps LE feel the killer will strike again during that season.:twocents:

And I also agree....there are so many questions in this case.....

ETA: Today, PART TWO of the series comes out. 'Eyes Wide Open'.

 

[Snoopster]

More food for thought. Here is part 2 in the Hamilton Spectator series.

Part 2: Eyes Wide Open
http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/594717--audrey-s-story-continues

More intereting tidbits, including a timeline. In the timeline there is no mention of AG contacting her coffee group to say she wasn't coming. Was that just erroneous reporting earlier on?

Good info about Audrey's personal life, plus PK's description of how he found her body and his impressions ("not too violent a scene"), which seems in contrast to LE's description.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

My first impressions of today's installment:

DISCREPENCIES:

He punched in the code on the keypad. The door rose. The Camaro was parked in its usual spot, both its doors closed.

That's when he saw her, he said, on the garage floor, lying on her back.

Had Audrey slipped and fallen on some ice, he wondered? Up close, he saw that was not the case.

She wore her winter coat. Her comfortable stretch pants were ripped.

He went outside and called 911 on his cell. The person on the other end asked him to confirm she was dead. He returned to the garage, knelt down and felt for a pulse.

Then he went outside, sat on the bumper of his car, and waited.

Police spoke of the brutality of the murder, that it had been a stabbing. She had also been beaten. From what Phil saw, or remembered, it was not a gruesome scene.


From what Hrab said at the outset, it was the most horrific scene he'd ever seen in his long career as a police officer. I was thinking it looked somewhat like the SV crime scene - all blood-covered and clearly a homicide on first glance. Phil says he thought she'd perhaps slipped on the icy ground.

These differences in description don't make sense to me.

What do the rest of you people think of these differences? What a conundrum!

QUESTIONS:
- was Audrey's face still its normal colour or had it begun to turn blue?
- since Audrey was such a private person, why would she give out her garage code to anyone? (no offence meant to Phil)
- does the 'eyes wide open' indicate a time of death?
- who else could have known Audrey's garage code?

So many questions linger.......

 

[colette]

Why was her coat on and why was she in the garage? Was she going somewhere and the killer caught her at the right moment with the door up and the dogs put away?

Could the killer have used a "code grabber" on her garage door to open it that morning and Audrey thought it was Phil and went out to meet him ?

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

More questions:

- what else was Audrey wearing - slippers and she just stepped out for a smoke or boots, handbag, etc. in order to take the Camaro out somewhere?
- why would the killer re-lock the garage door? (Phil had to use the code to open the garage door)
- how was the garage door closed? (did one need the code in order to close it and why/how was the code re-set?)
- did LV know the code?
- did Audrey usually leave the garage door open or was it always closed and code-locked when she was at home?
- what time of night did Audrey usually retire for the night? (if reasonably early, wouldn't she be wearing night clothes with the coat on top if she was merely stepping out for a smoke before bed?)

Too many unanswered questions.........

ETA: QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CAMARO:

- was the car usually LOCKED while inside the locked/coded garage?
- was the car itself locked when Audrey's body was found?
- were the car keys still in the house or wherever Audrey usually kept them?
- was the car alarm set and did it go off at any time during the night of the killing?
- what else was kept in that garage? (just 'car stuff' or possible killing instruments)
- how close to the car was Audrey's body lying? (I have a 'Vette which is quite similar to Audrey's Camaro and if I merely bump against it the alarm goes off - very embarassing in parking lots!!)
- did Audrey's body most likely fall against the Camaro when the attack took place? (alluding to my point above)
- how much space would the killer have had in which to do the killing? (again, referring to the alarm system on high end GM cars)

Still, too many questions..............

 

[dotr]

I would have thought that the" trophy" was undergarments- but as Hazel has pointed out, that would not be all that horrific for a seasoned Detective, unless of course "the sexual component" was that the garment was taken with a weapon, which also inflicted harm in the pelvic region.Even that may not be a terribly unusual trophy, as say ovaries or a uterus, (meaningful perhaps to one with motherhood issues..)
As for changing names... some may have family that one is ashamed of, ..alcoholic, former spies,political connection, stigma (from those days) of possibly being from a Roma (Gypsy) family.. a topical group in the news in Hamilton....
Nuclear friends, enemies..

 

[dotr]

Maybe that spiffy car even ticked someone off- were the car keys taken? Also, if AG liked to go online and stay up late, she may have had a late night visitor- perhaps an online friend, one with whom she may have shared unusual interests or intellectual pursuits- and using a more masculine name like Bary, allowed for that.

 

[flipflop]

More questions:

- did Audrey usually leave the garage door open or was it always closed and code-locked when she was at home?

with PK having the code and the way he describes his usual arrival I would assume she always had the door closed and code locked.
-
what time of night did Audrey usually retire for the night? (if reasonably early, wouldn't she be wearing night clothes with the coat on top if she was merely stepping out for a smoke before bed?)

I understand she was up all night on the computer, probably played bridge on it, too. And then she slept most of the day. I caught this in part 2 of the article.

 

[flipflop]

After reading the 2 parts of Audreys life in the Hamilton Spectator, which is well written and gives us all alot more insight into AG's life. I can't help but think how AG would have hated for all her private details of her life to be written in the newspaper for all to read.

 

[dotr]

After reading the 2 parts of Audreys life in the Hamilton Spectator, which is well written and gives us all alot more insight into AG's life. I can't help but think how AG would have hated for all her private details of her life to be written in the newspaper for all to read.

I agree that AG would no doubt have hated her personal life exposed- but then, perhaps one reason she was so secretive is because of her fear of what happened to her - happening. Could the killer have anticipated that his/her actions would lead to that sort of unpleasant exposure for AG, and those who knew her? Insult to injury!
The trouble is, that no one really knew her, therefore tidbits do need to be given to help coax some tips before this case goes totally cold.Gee, you would think that if someone did something that awful ( and was not a serial killer) that they would be unable to eat, sleep or continue living life as usual..unless perhaps, they stood to gain from her death, or a perceived wrong was" corrected".
Under the present circumstances, I would like to think Audrey would not mind tales out of school if it meant the school bully got identified and punished, before anyone else gets hurt.

 

[Hazel]

I have been thinking of Audrey all day.

These articles have answered many questions we had, but there are still so many unanswered questions.

What about Tuesday, December 28th?
We now know that Audrey e-mailed Phil twice before noon on the 27th, received a visit from LV bringing her soup around lunch time.
Then she took her two dogs to the Vet, who was the last person to see her alive. A bit later, around 6 pm, Audrey sent the same A.Grace she sent to Phil early that day, to her neighbour Linda.

Was that her very last e-mail? We were led to believe that she had e-mailed her Wednesday coffee group a bit later that same day (the 2th) letting them know she was not going to be able to make it. Did she send an e-mail? To whom? Now we know she didn't like sending 'group' e-mails. Or did she phone? Or neither, and it was a surprise for them when she just didn't show up that Wednesday?

LE must have taken her computer(s) for analyses. Did she login to her computer at all during the 28th? Did she login into her e-mail(s) account(s) to read, delete or at least mark messages as junk? Any activity at all?

I imagine Audrey must have had accounts in different games sites. Did she post on a forum? Did she have a blog? Why did she study graphic design if she didn't have any online persona?

Did she receive any phone calls from PK or LV asking her how she was feeling on the 28th? Did PK contact her after receiving her Monday e-mails to confirm he was visiting and bringing the cake on Thursday?

And what about Wednesday, December the 29th? All we know is she didn't attent the coffee meet, but was there any activity in her computer?
If she wasn't feeling well enough to go out, I would assume she would still be login into her computer at least once a day. How about paper delivery/mail delivery? There has to be 'something' that would indicate when the attack took place.

Good points about her footwear. Was she about to leave her home, was she coming back, was she just having a smoke, was she entertaining a visitor?

 

[dotr]

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/596879--a-gruesome-discovery-in-red-hill-creek-ravine
A gruesome discovery in Red Hill Creek ravine

GRUESOME DISCOVERY Aran Lauzier (left) with two friends, Jerry Wallace and John Temple, after he found the body
The Hamilton Spectator

KITCHENER "Even three decades after it was shot, it’s a newspaper photograph filled with poignancy.

It’s now retired Hamilton Spectator photographer Ron Pozzer’s snap of three solemn city lads, none of them looking at the camera.

Earlier that Saturday, the boys had made a gruesome discovery: the body of raped and murdered Diane Werendowicz, lying face down in a shallow ravine creek off Lake Avenue.

Werendowicz, a registered nursing assistant at McMaster University, would have celebrated her 24th birthday on the day she was murdered."

 

[Missizzy]

My mind has been on Audrey all day, too. You guys have just about covered every thought I had after reading the second installment. FWIW, make sure you keep going back to check for comments. Also, a quick reminder. We need to use only initials for all those considered uninvolved--such as PK or LV or the former husband. The mods will not be happy with us if we give them too much clean up work. Even if names are used in the media, we have to stick with initials but can certainly link to the article. Can you tell that I was classroom monitor while in grade school?

A possible answer to a question posed upthread about the garage door. Couldn't the killer have hit the closure button on the inside of the garage wall and quickly ducked out?



A few things that stuck out at me that I don't see mentioned:

I found it interesting that the author included the story about a rageful student and her threat. I happen to know (due to a number of relatives in the teaching profession) that that happens far more than we wish. I wonder what it was about this student that stood out?

Audrey went to the library every week and yet hardly used her home library any longer as she played games on line or watched her TV. What was she checking out at the library? Was it a place to meet someone? Was there someone at the library who knew her schedule? She surely had a tight routine.

I found it interesting that she studied handwriting analysis. Am I nuts or did someone on board do some searching and discover that Audrey might have been on WS not long before her murder? There's a good bit about handwriting analysis here on WS. I also seem to remember either posting or reading that we found her on a photography forum.

The author says that she took no vacations. She did when she was married to AG. Possibly she didn't want to leave her dogs or perhaps she was fearful of travel.

PK is reported here as saying that they didn't talk about science. Doesn't that contradict earlier reports that Audrey talked on and on to him about horticulture, etc? If they didn't talk about science (he is, after all, a very bright young man) what did they talk about?

Wasn't there an early comment about Audrey not liking to be touched or hugged? And yet this article clearly states that she hugged her vet when she went to his home to purchase vitamins for her dogs.

PK states that he doesn't need a theory concerning the murder. I wish he'd expound on this. I realize that he's probably still somewhat in shock at losing a dear friend but to not have or want a theory as to how she died? That strikes me as very surprising. I assumed he came on this board to read about our theories and to answer some of our questions. I surely appreciated his input.

And lastly, the death scene. A young man is not put off by the scene, merely thinking there's been a fall or even possibly a natural death? Yet, a hardened police chief is rattled, saying it's one of the worst he's seen. Which is it? I wouldn't think something such as this would be subjective. There's a comment under the article which questions whether or not a person would be instructed by the dispatcher to check for a pulse. That doesn't surprise me as I know that dispatchers are trained to talk you through resuscitation and if Audrey had just had a fall, she might have still been alive. But PK checks and finds none. If the scene was as brutal as the police led us to believe and there was a sexual component, could a dispatcher have really been able to talk a young man into going back to the body? I don't think I could return. What if the killer was still lurking about? PK states that there was nothing gruesome about the scene and he went outside to wait for the first responders. Was Audrey horribly assaulted and murdered and then redressed? Did PK miss the worst of the scene and only the police discover the full extent of the attack?

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

Part Three - Ominous Shadow

http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/596070--who-killed-audrey-gleave

I'll be back later after having digested it all!

 

[Canadian4]

Thanks for posting. It's interesting reading although this part focused too much on the wrong guy. IMO Scott didn't do it. And what is with that cruelty to animal charge for allowing his girlfriends cat to run away on purpose?? Sounds wacky.

 

[No_Stone_Unturned]

You're welcome. Yes, this one focuses far too much on the wrong guy - and for what it's worth, I always though that David Scott was merely a fall guy for LE. I think LE was very much under pressure to arrest someone and they found this outsider with somewhat odd behaviour. And, God forbid, one must not be odd in the eyes of society!

I think the real killer is perfectly "normal" looking to the entire community. I think he's a perfect gentleman, well-groomed, has a stable lifestyle, the whole normal thing society wants to see! Only problem with him is that he's a killer under the nice veneer.

ETA:Online true-crime chat forums discussed the case at length. Why did she keep her married name, Gleave, all those years; why not go back to Doveika? Had Audrey — computer junkie that she was, up at all hours of the night — met someone online who frightened her? Is that why she was so paranoid about privacy and safety? Had Audrey been the one to email friends just prior to her death, or was the killer on her computer, pretending to be her?


This part goes back to my original thought that the killer was holding Audrey hostage inside her home and it was the killer who did some emailing from Audrey's computer. The only thing that sort of contradicts that notion is the fact that her body was found in the garage rather than somewhere inside the house. Unless, the killer had lured Audrey out to the garage on a pretence of asking her to drive him somewhere.