CANADA Canada - Elizabeth Bain, 22, Scarborough, Ont, 19 June 1990 #2

[eyesonly]

Posted by julia36 """"The only thing I wonder about when it comes to Bernardo and EB is that he had not escalated to murder, at this point. He certainly is a viable suspect and it should continue to be investigated.""""""

Jmo.
From everything I've read and researched on Bernardo, as he was the main alternate suspect in RB's appeal, I don't believe he actually was the hand that killed any of the girls. I firmly believe it was homolka who ended all of their lives. Bernardo was a rapist, his victims were his trophies alive. He fell apart when Tammy died.
I also believe he thought he could kidnap the girls and let them go. However karla knew better. It was actually Karla's idea to kidnap a girl for him to use as a sex slave. I think she knew exactly what she was doing. She got a rush from her sisters death, and wanted to do it again.
Bernardo was a sick demented rapist, but I believe that karla was the true evil one in that relationship.
On another note, is it generally possible for a rapist who escalates to murder to go back to raping without killing the victim?

Having said all that, Bernardo has not been eliminated. He will always be on the radar imo.
The only person I am 100% confident in eliminating is RB.

Again all jmo

 

[Woodland]

Fwiw, there has been a trial in this case with much evidence put forward - one can look that evidence up and much of it, if not all, is here. A book has been written with much of that evidence covered. Yet, some posters do not encompass that evidence when posting - as if it does not exist. It does exist - maybe posters can use that in their posts, rather than ignoring it? This is not a typical cold case with no where to start looking.

Theories are great when evidence is lacking - but in this case, forensic evidence is not much lacking. If we all use that available evidence - or discount it for a viable reason, things might go a little smoother? Jmo. We all want EB located, right?

Fwiw, eyesonly and I totally disagree on what happened - yet we do agree to disagree. I consider 'eyes' my bud and respect her opinions and hard work over the many years she has covered this case - why can't we all do that? We have the same resources.

 

[Julia36]

why not?

<modsnip>

at this point everything and anything is a possibility....why exclude the family from the possibility? <modsnip>

IMO, I don't think that the family had any involvement in EB's disappearance...this is my opinion only. <modsnip> I read the book many years ago and have forgotten some of the details but the information I did retain leads me to believe in other theories then the family. Clearly your opinion is that the family is involved. My mind is open to all scenairo's but I need to hear something complelling to lead me in that direction. That is lacking for me, thus far. I also believe that one needs to be careful in making such an accusation because this is not just pointing the finger at anyone...it's pointing the finger at the family. That's just my personal take on things<modsnip>

 

[eyesonly]

IMO, I don't think that the family had any involvement in EB's disappearance...this is my opinion only. <modsnip> I read the book many years ago and have forgotten some of the details but the information I did retain leads me to believe in other theories then the family. Clearly your opinion is that the family is involved. My mind is open to all scenairo's but I need to hear something complelling to lead me in that direction. That is lacking for me, thus far. I also believe that one needs to be careful in making such an accusation because this is not just pointing the finger at anyone...it's pointing the finger at the family. That's just my personal take on things<modsnip>

<modsnip>It is very much a reality in many cases that family is involved and I don't think there are any posts on here that have been personally cruel or disrespectful persay in regards to the family.
There are several inconsistencies with some of their stories, and I will try and compile some today and post for you to take a look at.

 

[eyesonly]

Fwiw, there has been a trial in this case with much evidence put forward - one can look that evidence up and much of it, if not all, is here. A book has been written with much of that evidence covered. Yet, some posters do not encompass that evidence when posting - as if it does not exist. It does exist - maybe posters can use that in their posts, rather than ignoring it? This is not a typical cold case with no where to start looking.

Theories are great when evidence is lacking - but in this case, forensic evidence is not much lacking. If we all use that available evidence - or discount it for a viable reason, things might go a little smoother? Jmo. We all want EB located, right?

Fwiw, eyesonly and I totally disagree on what happened - yet we do agree to disagree. I consider 'eyes' my bud and respect her opinions and hard work over the many years she has covered this case - why can't we all do that? We have the same resources.

Actually wd, I think we agree on who may have done it, just not the number of ppl involved, where it happened, and where she might be.
So I disagree with your ""totally disagree""" assessment.

 

[eyesonly]

Julia36.
MB is Eb's brother.
--his first police statement he says he went straight from night school to his gfs house.
--RB's statement says he saw MB's car in their driveway when he went over around 9:15pm and talked to Mrs B on their driveway.
--Detective Raybould visited the B household about 3 weeks before RB was arrested. Took each of them one by one to his vehicle to talk to them. (JS, direct knowledge of this). At this time MB's new statement states he went went home first after class and then went to his gfs house.
--Mrs B testifies she remembers Rob being there at 9:15ishpm and it was less than a five minute encounter. Yet she says MB was not home that night and never acknowledges actually seeing him at anytime after class ended even though she says she was working on the driveway till almost 11pm that night because of how bright it was.
--MB testifies in the prelim that he came home at 6am Wed morning from gfs, told his mom to call RB, she did, then he (mb) got on the phone to give RB directions to AC's house (the girl Eb told Rb she was having dinner with that night).
Then he went to work. He testifies the same version at the trial.
--Rb has stated from the beginning that Mrs B called him, he came right over, MB called from work shortly after he got there, and Mrs B handed him the phone and he asked Mb for directions to AC's home.
--Mrs B's both prelim and trial testimony are identical to Rb's version.
--MB testifies in prelims that he was at work on Friday when he phoned home and was told they found the car and he dropped the phone and went straight home without saying anything to anyone.
In his trial testimony, MB now states on the friday he was at a friend's house on their street when he called home from the kitchen, talked to his mom, and went straight home. He mentions nothing about being at work and going home. (Note to woodland, I just was able to get this info about Mb trial testimony in the last couple days, processing it myself)
--MB's gf NS, testifies at trial she was out for a jog, jogging to the B house on the friday, she saw Eb's youngest brother PB coming down morrish Rd (same Rd car found on) as she was jogging. He was supposedly on way to his mechanic. She got in his car, they did a U-turn and drove back up morrish where PB suddenly spotted the car.
--JS who is in the book and got involved with the searches and the B family and ended up marrying Ebs aunt, Mrs B's sister, has told me that the only version he's ever heard of this encounter from back in 1990 was that PB went down morrish, (actually passing Eb's car) and bumped into Nancy, did a U-turn went back up and found the car.
--PB was not involved in the prelims for some reason. But in his trial testimony, he describes that he went down the angular street to the east of morrish Rd and bumped into Nancy at the bottom of morrish, then went up morrish and found the car.
--NS was asked a couple times on examination by prosecution about PBs route when she saw his car and she never wavered from him coming down morrish Rd.

I've been to the area where the car was found many many times and I can tell you that there is no way he would have missed the car driving south by it. As he stated, when he didn't have a car he drove Ebs car everyday. JS says PB loved that car. --PB testifies he has a good eye for cars. His sister is missing. Every lot you drive by, every car you pass, you are on alert for basically your own car. Morrish is not a very wide street. The way the cars were parked where the car was found, there is absolutely no way he would have missed it.

Sorry, long post. Will end off for now. All mention of testimonies and statements are factual.
Anything else is jmo

 

[Woodland]

When moving a body to the trunk of a car, one must lift the body. To move a body into the back seat floor boards, one needs only to drag. Hence, the drag marks that were found. Lifting dead weight, such as a body, would be quite a task for one person to do themselves. As far as the perservative in the blood, what I was stating is that when blood is taken (phlebotomy) the vials that hold the blood also contain a preservative. This was the only point I was making. To me, the drag marks are of no mystery. Common sense. You drag a body that is bleeding, its gonna leave drag marks. Pulling the body the same direction outwards may not have left any drag marks. Its either she was dragged or picked up. Since to drag is easier, this would be my guess.

Well, with all due respect CFS disagreed with the thought in 1990 that a body was removed from the rear of EB's car. Would they do so today? Imo, Hulk Hogan would have difficulty lifting a body completely upright and out of a two-door vehicle and not leave a mark of any kind that CFS could not detect. Jmo.

As for the blood - is there a point here? Still not getting it. Did the blood belong to EB or her sister? Did the preservative block something?

 

[eyesonly]

Well, with all due respect CFS disagreed with the thought in 1990 that a body was removed from the rear of EB's car. Would they do so today? Imo, Hulk Hogan would have difficulty lifting a body completely upright and out of a two-door vehicle and not leave a mark of any kind that CFS could not detect. Jmo.

As for the blood - is there a point here? Still not getting it. Did the blood belong to EB or her sister? Did the preservative block something?

I'm not so sure CFS disagreed with a body being removed from the back. They just said they had no forensic evidence to show one was removed. (And fwiw they used the term, large bulky object and not body).
As for planting the blood. I don't see how anyone who's never done this before, would be able to put blood in the right places, and understand smearing, and directional smearing, to the point of fooling CFS scientists.

 

[eyesonly]

CFS says large bulky object pulled in to the back of the car. But no forensic evidence that it was pulled back out of the car. Yet when car is found, there is no bulky object in the back of the car.
Suggestions on how this is possible. I have one, but would like to see what others come up with.

 

[JohnPaul]

Julia36.
MB is Eb's brother.
--his first police statement he says he went straight from night school to his gfs house.
--RB's statement says he saw MB's car in their driveway when he went over around 9:15pm and talked to Mrs B on their driveway.
--Detective Raybould visited the B household about 3 weeks before RB was arrested. Took each of them one by one to his vehicle to talk to them. (JS, direct knowledge of this). At this time MB's new statement states he went went home first after class and then went to his gfs house.
--Mrs B testifies she remembers Rob being there at 9:15ishpm and it was less than a five minute encounter. Yet she says MB was not home that night and never acknowledges actually seeing him at anytime after class ended even though she says she was working on the driveway till almost 11pm that night because of how bright it was.
--MB testifies in the prelim that he came home at 6am Wed morning from gfs, told his mom to call RB, she did, then he (mb) got on the phone to give RB directions to AC's house (the girl Eb told Rb she was having dinner with that night).
Then he went to work. He testifies the same version at the trial.
--Rb has stated from the beginning that Mrs B called him, he came right over, MB called from work shortly after he got there, and Mrs B handed him the phone and he asked Mb for directions to AC's home.
--Mrs B's both prelim and trial testimony are identical to Rb's version.
--MB testifies in prelims that he was at work on Friday when he phoned home and was told they found the car and he dropped the phone and went straight home without saying anything to anyone.
In his trial testimony, MB now states on the friday he was at a friend's house on their street when he called home from the kitchen, talked to his mom, and went straight home. He mentions nothing about being at work and going home. (Note to woodland, I just was able to get this info about Mb trial testimony in the last couple days, processing it myself)
--MB's gf NS, testifies at trial she was out for a jog, jogging to the B house on the friday, she saw Eb's youngest brother PB coming down morrish Rd (same Rd car found on) as she was jogging. He was supposedly on way to his mechanic. She got in his car, they did a U-turn and drove back up morrish where PB suddenly spotted the car.
--JS who is in the book and got involved with the searches and the B family and ended up marrying Ebs aunt, Mrs B's sister, has told me that the only version he's ever heard of this encounter from back in 1990 was that PB went down morrish, (actually passing Eb's car) and bumped into Nancy, did a U-turn went back up and found the car.
--PB was not involved in the prelims for some reason. But in his trial testimony, he describes that he went down the angular street to the east of morrish Rd and bumped into Nancy at the bottom of morrish, then went up morrish and found the car.
--NS was asked a couple times on examination by prosecution about PBs route when she saw his car and she never wavered from him coming down morrish Rd.

I've been to the area where the car was found many many times and I can tell you that there is no way he would have missed the car driving south by it. As he stated, when he didn't have a car he drove Ebs car everyday. JS says PB loved that car. --PB testifies he has a good eye for cars. His sister is missing. Every lot you drive by, every car you pass, you are on alert for basically your own car. Morrish is not a very wide street. The way the cars were parked where the car was found, there is absolutely no way he would have missed it.

Sorry, long post. Will end off for now. All mention of testimonies and statements are factual.
Anything else is jmo

when somebody changes their story so many times i just don't understand why they would not investigate this any further

LE f'ed up big time on this case and crapped the bed under pressure.....so sad

 

[eyesonly]

Question:
Does anyone know if blood is taken from a live person, and stored in a vial with/without preservatives, when that blood is exposed to the air, will it still coagulate. Thanks in advance

 

[Woodland]

I'm not so sure CFS disagreed with a body being removed from the back. They just said they had no forensic evidence to show one was removed. (And fwiw they used the term, large bulky object and not body).
As for planting the blood. I don't see how anyone who's never done this before, would be able to put blood in the right places, and understand smearing, and directional smearing, to the point of fooling CFS scientists.

Agree eyesonly that CFS found no forensic evidence that a body or large bulky item was removed from the rear of EB's 2-door vehicle. However, CFS did say they found drag marks going into the vehicle. Also, CFS said no buried/dug up body was ever in the back of EB's vehicle.

Fwiw, I compare this to the death of Wayne Millard (there is a thread on WS) - originally deemed a suicide by Toronto Police. Hamilton Police arrested son Dellen on another murder charge and Dellen was found guilty of that murder (TB). Now, TPS has charged DM with the murder of his father WM. So, how did DM manage to convince TPS or leave a trail that convinced TPS that WM originally committed suicide?

Point is, apparently one can in fact mislead investigators into believing something that did not happen.

 

[Woodland]

CFS says large bulky object pulled in to the back of the car. But no forensic evidence that it was pulled back out of the car. Yet when car is found, there is no bulky object in the back of the car.
Suggestions on how this is possible. I have one, but would like to see what others come up with.

I have heard that 'what goes up, must come down'. As far as the appearance that something went right but not left - not sure.

 

[Woodland]

A step closer in the use of drones imo -

Smaller, more powerful, inexpensive UAVs are devices about the size of a bread box in the shape of anything from miniature fixed-wing aircraft to rotor-bladed "quad-copters" loaded with high resolution point-and- shoot cameras, thermal imagery, geographic information systems, flight pattern software and GPS.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitch...changing-agriculture-from-the-skies-1.3727976

I give it 3 years where one can fly a drone over a certain area and 'see' if a body is buried there or not. Ooh, ah.

 

[Julia36]

Well, with all due respect CFS disagreed with the thought in 1990 that a body was removed from the rear of EB's car. Would they do so today? Imo, Hulk Hogan would have difficulty lifting a body completely upright and out of a two-door vehicle and not leave a mark of any kind that CFS could not detect. Jmo.

As for the blood - is there a point here? Still not getting it. Did the blood belong to EB or her sister? Did the preservative block something?

I thought I was clear with my reply earlier woodland but I will explain again. If blood were planted, and that blood was proven to be an offspring of Mr and Mrs. B then one must obtain that blood in order for it to be planted, as what was stated earlier. When you take blood from someone, they use vials. The vials have a preservative. That preservative would be detected by CFS when analyzed. What I am stating is CFS would know if the blood was planted. With regards to Hulk Hogan lifting the body...I agree. This is why I stated that the body would not have been placed in the trunk. This is why I stated that the body was dragged in and out of the backseat of the vehicle...not lifted. I never stated lifted! I hope this is finally clear for you.

 

[JohnPaul]

When you take blood from someone, they use vials. The vials have a preservative. That preservative would be detected by CFS when analyzed.

that is not necessarily true, you don't have to use a vial,

that would only be true if blood was taken at a hospital or clinic,

i could draw blood from myself using a syringe at home and store it in any container i want to,

remember Mrs B is a nurse, and so was daughter C, they would know these things

 

[Chorley8]

But Post 211 says CFS says drag marks only go in not out. I still am not sure of how much blood there was.... one estimation was less than you would have drawn donating so less than a pint....but how much less? I understand the scenario being explored by some here is that the scene is staged. If we take the CFS statement of only in not out totally seriously (but should we?) then that is a possibility of course.

It is not difficult to think of other things that could have happened....EB restrained tied up/restrained/captured bleeding dragged in but conscious....ordered at point of weapon at the destination point to walk/get out. Or she regains consciousness during transportation....somewhere. More farfetched she regains consciosness in the car escapes crawls into woods but expires.

Why would Mom and sister not think of the need for there to be smear marks going out?

 

[JohnPaul]

Why would Mom and sister not think of the need for there to be smear marks going out?

i am sure when it is (presumably) your first time covering up such a crime, you would overlook and not think of many things,

the smearing could have been done unintentionally, maybe somebody put blood there and it didn't quite look "natural", so they tried to adjust the looks of it using a rubber glove, not thinking about smear marks at all

 

[eyesonly]

The detective on the case in 1990. He rose very quickly to inspector and then to deputy chief. The youngest ever. Last name starts with Re....
Here is his theory of how RB killed EB.

RB kills EB down in the valley, Tues June 19 1990, near the campus between 5:45pm-7pm. (Broad daylight with many people walking the paths and kids over getting tennis lessons and nobody heard a thing.
RB then goes and gets Ebs car, puts her in it, this creating the fresh blood smears, and moves her to another part of the park, takes her out of the car and hides her.
RB then makes it to the campus parking lot by 7:15pm where he is witnessed going from the parking lot to the campus gym to workout.
RB then goes back Friday in the early am sometime after 1am (because he is in the police station from 11pm Thurs June 21st until Friday June 22nd at 1am being interviewed by police.) He goes back in Ebs car and wraps the body real good, puts the body back in Ebs car and drives it up to the port Perry area and disposes of it, and brings her car back sometime in the afternoon before it is discovered at approx 2pm by Ebs youngest brother and the gf of Ebs brother Mb.
( There are two witness's from the 3r auto body, the owner and the Secretary whose window view could directly see the car, both testify the car was there all morning from at least 730am. Both testify it was in the exact same position and place it was when they saw it on Wed the 20th and thurs the 21st and Fri the 22nd).
I personally cannot believe that an inspector at the time of the trial would actually put forth such a fantastical theory. I'm not sure even Hollywood would write something so ludicrous.
Anyways, just wanted to share that.
We all know RB is innocent. Just wanted to share LEs theory.

 

[Flossie JMO]

But Post 211 says CFS says drag marks only go in not out. I still am not sure of how much blood there was.... one estimation was less than you would have drawn donating so less than a pint....but how much less? I understand the scenario being explored by some here is that the scene is staged. If we take the CFS statement of only in not out totally seriously (but should we?) then that is a possibility of course.

It is not difficult to think of other things that could have happened....EB restrained tied up/restrained/captured bleeding dragged in but conscious....ordered at point of weapon at the destination point to walk/get out. Or she regains consciousness during transportation....somewhere. More farfetched she regains consciosness in the car escapes crawls into woods but expires.

Why would Mom and sister not think of the need for there to be smear marks going out?

"The forensics experts told Raybould that there was too much blood in the car for a body that had been left outside for days, the note allegedly states. If a body had been put into the car two to three days after death, it would have left a strong odour and blood stains would have been darker in colour, not bright red as the police found them."


https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...t_baltovich_says_police_hid_key_evidence.html