Canada - Lucas Fowler, Chynna Deese, and Leonard Dyck, all murdered, Alaska Hwy, BC, Jul 2019 #14

Status
Not open for further replies.
Makes me wonder if, initially, they were heading out to play a real life version of the game. However, after the killings of Lucas and Chynna, they had huge regrets so they stayed out of sight for a few days trying to decide what to do. They realized there was no going back and they were pretty well screwed, so they took advantage of Len and his RAV4 and high tailed it out of there. While driving all that time through BC to Manitoba they made a pack to each other. Just my thoughts.

Why didn't they wear disguises when walking into that Co-op store in Meadow Lake? I'm not talking about false noses and fake beards. Hoodies and ball caps are usually used because surveillance cameras are usually placed high up.
 
I think the trajectory and entrance wounds would have told them.

I imagine them sticking the barrels in their mouths, and doing it that way.

Especially if these were long-guns, like a rifle or shotgun (which is what I think they used).

They didn’t say murder/suicide, and each of them shooting the other one would require perfect timing.

There should also be gun shot residue on their hands.
 
Not surprised by this outcome, both died by suicide.

I am curious though as to why no gunshots were heard, does anyone know why that might be?
Was the bush dense enough to muffle the sound?
Could they have had silencers of some kind?

Maybe this info will be forthcoming.
 
Well that officer all but told us with his interview the other day.

The only thing that slightly surprises me, is that these two had two weapons on them (from RCMP statement).
I thought they had killed themselves shortly after they ditched the RAV4.

Maybe they had 2 guns and only 2 bullets and that's why no one else was killed?
 
Not surprised by this outcome, both died by suicide.

I am curious though as to why no gunshots were heard, does anyone know why that might be?
Was the bush dense enough to muffle the sound?
Could they have had silencers of some kind?

Maybe this info will be forthcoming.
I live in a rural area and my closest neighbour is 2km away via the road, further thru the bush. She shot off her 12-gauge the other day to scare away a bear and I didn't hear it. Other times I have heard it. Depends on a few factors I think but if they were 9km away from people, doubtful anyone heard it.
 
Cowards. They are cowards. Everything they did was cowardly.

I'm surprised at the two guns. I was heading in the direction that they had lost the gun(s), ammo etc., because they didn't kill anyone else or steal another vehicle. I figured the gun was essential to the stealing of vehicles and control of the victims. But they still had them and chose not to use them to "get away".

So they didn't want to go out in a "blaze of glory". They didn't want to be shot by the Police. It sounds like they didn't last long in the bush but chose to go out their way.

Why? Why all of this? Was this the ultimate plan?

Two cowardly 18/19 year old misfits destroyed 5 families and countless friends for what?

That's the hard part now. Why? And we will probably never know.

I hope the victims families are getting lots of support and assistance. This will be very very hard for them.

MOO
 
I think the trajectory and entrance wounds would have told them.

I imagine them sticking the barrels in their mouths, and doing it that way.

Especially if these were long-guns, like a rifle or shotgun (which is what I think they used).

They didn’t say murder/suicide, and each of them shooting the other one would require perfect timing.

If long guns then I still wonder how they hell they could hide those in the roadside check. You can't put them under a seat, and chances are they were not hidden in advance to evade detection in a search, since they were not expecting that at all.
 
I think a lot of what you suggest should "change" is already in place.

Health care is free in Canada and it would be hard to make it cheaper. I don't think you can say this all happened because the system failed.

Oh, the system fails all the time. I'll give one example.

Let's say a child needs a psychoeducational assessment. Where I am from, school principals have a budget and they determine how funds will be spent in their schools. So in a school of 650 students, only two students per year were selected. The kindergarten students would not be among the chosen ones, because kindergarten is not compulsory. Over the course of six years in elementary school, that child has 12 chances to be chosen. There are always new students coming in, and their needs might be considered more urgent.

If a parent has money, they can pay privately for an assessment, but this costs a few thousand dollars. Even if a parent has a good job with benefits, often the health plan will not cover these fees. There is a tax deduction for such claims. This isn't the full amount, and does little good if you don't have the money in the first place.

Let's say the child is the chosen one, and the school pays for the assessment. The child is now coded and has an IPP in place. Some codes are funded. Others are not. The child without the funded code may not get any extra help, like occupational therapy, etc. It's up to the principal. The parent may have to fight for every item in the IPP, like preferential seating, because some teachers won't cooperate, necessitating endless meetings with the teacher, principal and resource teacher.

If a child has a funded code, the school is allocated those funds. There is no guarantee the child will get any help. The funds go into the general budget, so the principal can decide to hire a specialist Phys Ed teacher or whatever. There is no accountability chain to ensure the funds are spent on the child for whom they are intended. The principal is not held to account, because the School Act makes them masters of their own domain.

Even a well-educated parent with a wonderful job, superior health benefits and plenty of free time would have a hard time negotiating this maze, if such a lucky parent exists. They'd better have high energy, too, because they'll need it.
 
Not surprised by this outcome, both died by suicide.

I am curious though as to why no gunshots were heard, does anyone know why that might be?
Was the bush dense enough to muffle the sound?
Could they have had silencers of some kind?

Maybe this info will be forthcoming.

They didn't die near a town, and if the bush is dense, it would absorb the sound of a gunshot. Also, if they were shot in the middle of the night, nobody would be around to hear it. No need to use a silencer. What would be the point, you're gonna off yourself, why bother keeping it quiet?
 
Not surprised by this outcome, both died by suicide.

I am curious though as to why no gunshots were heard, does anyone know why that might be?
Was the bush dense enough to muffle the sound?
Could they have had silencers of some kind?

Maybe this info will be forthcoming.

Rapids in rivers are extremely loud, and they were between two big sets of rapids. Not to mention, that if they were .22 rifles, they don't make much more than a little pop.
 
kam family home.
Did the Dad have guns? You would think he would have reported them missing to the police. Maybe Kam's parents gave him money on a regular basis (thought I read somewhere that the parents are kind of "well off") and he purchased the weapons off the street?
 
Please be nice to me, i'm not an english native speaker, there's a big chance i'm misinterpreting the sentence... but isn't "what appears to be suicides by gunfire" inconclusive?
To me (as non-english native speaker) it sounds like the cause of death was by gunshots but they are not sure yet who fired the guns.

JMO
You haven't misinterpreted at all. It is somewhat nebulous.

But remember - nature (wildlife, insects, environmental factors, etc.) would have taken their toll after they were dead. They could have been starving, injured, already had encounters with wildlife, suffered from "beaver fever" (extreme gastro upset and resulting dehydration) and been mercilessly under constant attack by swarms of insects while still alive, which could have contributed to their dire physical condition at the time of post mortems.

They were likely already suffering from things that would have killed them when they made their decision to end it. Self-inflicted gunshot wounds were simply the most obvious cause of death.

One can't help but feel for the searchers who found them and had to move their remains.

All of the above is just my opinion.
 
Has he really said anything to warrant public shaming though?

Kudos boys is questionable at best.
I haven't seen the show so can't comment further on content of interview. I stand by my post though.

Imo he's apologetic
Yet in denial that his son committed these murders until he's presented evidence. An expected reaction from a parent but one that may have rendered his apology dubious, perhaps insulting, to the victim's families.

He has the right to speak about his opinions and feelings
Likewise, the public has the right to respond, favorably or not.

He also has some issues of his own
Indeed he does yet doesn't appear to fully realize it

Also remember the media is taking advantage of this.

So is AS ($$$$)


The "kudos boys" was certainly eyebrow-raising until I saw it in context. The reports on the episode, and the episode itself, twisted it to make it seem that he said "kudos" as a response to the teens evading police. Actually, they had been filming him for two weeks, catching everything as it happened. He was filmed saying the "kudos" the day they were seen alive in Saskatchewan and weren't even named as suspects yet. Until that point, he thought they were missing... victims, lost, or kidnapped. When he heard they were seen alive he said the "kudos boys!" in response to them being alive and possibly located.. He was ecstatic that they were seemingly okay. Later on when he had more info on the situation and they were named as suspects, he was filmed again clarifying that he said that because he was happy they were alive and not "lost in the woods".
He was never cheering them on for evading police as it was made to seem.

I think being in denial until he has some facts is reasonable... It's got to be an incredibly hard and confusing situation to accept, even with evidence. Why would he just assume his son is a murderer without having heard any facts or evidence? He made that quite clear, that he hadn't been offered any facts or evidence (at the time of recording). Innocent until proven guilty, y'know?

And sure he might have issues that he "may not know the extent of", but I don't either so I won't speculate on that further. However, there's been talk of him being homeless. If that's the case, being offered money by the media to talk might be quite enticing, especially if he's already an outspoken guy... which he has appeared to be since the beginning. Imo.
 
Last edited:
Because they didn’t have to.

They might still be working on confirming that, but it seems readily apparent that these two guns were used to commit suicide, as they were found with the bodies.

But they need to. I find it interesting that they refer to confirming any link to the other murders, but not to these deaths.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
210
Guests online
3,369
Total visitors
3,579

Forum statistics

Threads
592,141
Messages
17,964,053
Members
228,700
Latest member
amberdw2021
Back
Top