Canada - Lucas Fowler, Chynna Deese, and Leonard Dyck, all murdered, Alaska Hwy, BC, Jul 2019 #15

[FactFinder3000]

The murders of Chynna and Lucas occurred 465 km away from where the burned truck was found.

If the truck was disabled, how did Bryer and Kam get to the location of the double murder and back again?

 

[SnooperDuper]

The two drugs have similar effects. Drug abuse runs in families.

It's most likely false allegations anyway. But I think we can't rule out at this point the off chance that there was at least some grain of truth in it.

I have to wonder why, if AS thought that BS was drug-damaged in 2008, he didn't tell the media that, if that could explain everything. Perhaps he did learn a lesson from the courts to not make false allegations?

 

[Zella]

If Bryer does have bad teeth--which isn't necessarily related to anyone's drug use or neglect--that might be why he doesn't smile very much in pics once he gets older. Even when he does smile, he seems to make a point of not showing his teeth. Could be self-conscious about his teeth.

 

[scrappinkat]

But if there were any truth to the allegations, wouldn't BS have been taken away from DS and put in AS's custody? I mean, children's services would have definitely become involved if someone alleged drug use in the home. Instead AS was banned from seeing BS without supervision for 8 years. Isn't that telling?

Not to me no, it doesn’t tell anything. There is so many documented failures of children’s services. Every day children fall thru the cracks and remain in situations that are detrimental and/or dangerous to their well being, because the system really is broken.

 

[Snoop Sister]

I think the bottom line is that AS was alienated as a parent. Additionally, I think if he had gone through the court system present day, the outcome would have been very different. Regardless, of the harassment of his wife (if this were the case) he had a right to see his son. If there were legit concerns, supervised visits at the very least.

Presently, in the court systems, alienation of a parent MIGHT in the worse possible scenario lead to the loss of custody of their child by the alienating parent. Courts do not take too kindly to alienation and imo AS was alienated.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Not to me no, it doesn’t tell anything. There is so many documented failures of children’s services. Every day children fall thru the cracks and remain in situations that are detrimental and/or dangerous to their well being, because the system really is broken.

But AS's allegations would have been heard in court over 10 years if DS alleged that they were harassment, and for AS to be found guilty (as he was), his accusations would have to have been groundless.

I don't understand how the system could be so broken that both the children services and the court of law would have ruled against him. That's a lot of eyes on BS's care.

That the "system is broken" is AS's point of view because he didn't get what he wanted. I don't think AS is the most credible character.

 

[1987]

AS is a perpetual victim. apparently everyone has wronged him in some way in his eyes.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I think the bottom line is that AS was alienated as a parent. Additionally, I think if he had gone through the court system present day, the outcome would have been very different. Regardless, of the harassment of his wife (if this were the case) he had a right to see his son. If there were legit concerns, supervised visits at the very least.

Presently, in the court systems, alienation of a parent MIGHT in the worse possible scenario lead to the lose custody of their child by the alienating parent. Courts do not take too kindly to alienation and imo AS was alienated.

He was in fact granted the right to supervised visits with BS.

As far as alienation from BS, I think that is a situation of his own making. You can't blame the courts for his bizarre behaviour and alcohol abuse. He has to take some responsibility for his situation instead of blaming everyone else.

 

[otto]

It sounds like an acrimonious divorce, lasting from 2005 - 2008, where custody was a major factor. It's not uncommon for parents who choose this path to hurl all sorts of false allegations against each other. There may have been a court ordered psychological evaluation of both parents to determine the best interests of the child. Given the father's comments about a psychological evaluation, it's possible that the report was highly critical of him. Did it come down to who could afford the better lawyer, was the psychologist biased towards mothers, was the father so distressed that he appeared incoherent and delusional? Who knows.

What we do know is that Bryer was raised by his mother and her new husband. He appeared to be a relatively happy child around the age of 8, and he was a suicidal murderer 10 years later.

 

[scrappinkat]

Additionally, I think If he had gone through the court system present day, the outcome would have been very different.

It seems that at least for some of his appearances he represented himself, maybe due to lack of funds to keep a lawyer retained?

 

[Snoop Sister]

He was in fact granted the right to supervised visits with BS.

As far as alienation from BS, I think that is a situation of his own making. You can't blame the courts for his bizarre behaviour and alcohol abuse. He has to take some responsibility for his situation instead of blaming everyone else.

AS was granted supervised in the 8 years, he didn’t see BS? If there is a link to this, will you please provide it. I must have missed it.

 

[Zella]

My personal take is I don't think the allegations Bryer's dad made against Bryer's mom were credible. However, I think it is possible that Bryer's dad thought they were real. He said in his book that he was diagnosed as delusional at one point, a diagnosis he rejected.

Alan Schmegelsky, father of northern B.C. murder suspect, details troubled life in book

I'm not comfortable speculating on who is at fault or what happened beyond that, except to say this was clearly an incredibly protracted and acrimonious divorce, and I have no doubt that it was very painful for Bryer and had a huge impact on him growing up.

 

[Snoop Sister]

It sounds like an acrimonious divorce, lasting from 2005 - 2008, where custody was a major factor. It's not uncommon for parents who choose this path to hurl all sorts of false allegations against each other. There may have been a court ordered psychological evaluation of both parents to determine the best interests of the child. Given the father's comments about a psychological evaluation, it's possible that the report was highly critical of him. Did it come down to who could afford the better lawyer, was the psychologist biased towards mothers, was the father so distressed that he appeared incoherent and delusional? Who knows.

What we do know is that Bryer was raised by his mother and her new husband. He appeared to be a relatively happy child around the age of 8, and he was a suicidal murderer 10 years later.

BBM
I think a lot depends on who has the better lawyer

 

[NJSleuth91]

But if there were any truth to the allegations, wouldn't BS have been taken away from DS and put in AS's custody? I mean, children's services would have definitely become involved if someone alleged drug use in the home. Instead AS was banned from seeing BS without supervision for 8 years. Isn't that telling?

Maybe. Maybe not. The system is really broken. My mom easily got full custody of us and she had literally tried to murder us in the past. Things are overlooked all the time. If both parents are off the rails but one is way more obvious about it than the other, social services is probably only going to focus on the obviously off the rails parent.

But I do think it's also telling that their neighbor from a few pages back said from ages 11-13, long after Bryer's dad was gone, his home life was "[expletive]" and that he was over at their house all the time because he couldn't have fun at his own house. To me saying someone's home life is "[expletive]" doesn't just mean they don't get along with their mom or that they're poor, it means that something really depressing is going on. And there are several accounts like that where he was over at other kids' houses all the time to avoid going home, long after his dad wasn't in the picture. That's really the main reason why I think it can't be ruled out 100%. I mean I don't want to like, insult his mom, but I also think we have to consider every possibility.

It's also possible that someone else in the household was the drug user.

I have to wonder why, if AS thought that BS was drug-damaged in 2008, he didn't tell the media that, if that could explain everything. Perhaps he did learn a lesson from the courts to not make false allegations?

Well, he kind of did, it was hinted at in the excerpts of the book that the media published.

If Bryer does have bad teeth--which isn't necessarily related to anyone's drug use or neglect--that might be why he doesn't smile very much in pics once he gets older. Even when he does smile, he seems to make a point of not showing his teeth. Could be self-conscious about his teeth.

I noticed that too after reading the excerpts. It could mean something, or not, we really can't say at this point.

Not to me no, it doesn’t tell anything. There is so many documented failures of children’s services. Every day children fall thru the cracks and remain in situations that are detrimental and/or dangerous to their well being, because the system really is broken.

Exactly. There's been so many high-profile cases of social service failures with tragic consequences...I recommend not looking them up unless you want to have a really bad time...and those are the worst of the worst, there are so many failures that don't make it to the news. The system is way overburdened and the people working in it are underpaid and burned out. JMO.

 

[FactFinder3000]

In the letter he says: "Meth abuse has been documented in several states in the USA of creating or causing 85% of criminal activity."

I don't think we have any way right now to conclusively determine what any of this means...but overall it is just truly bizarre.

It's a number he got from somewhere. A quick google search turns up this: "Portland cop Travis Fields spends his days on the lookout for meth addicts because they commit 85 percent of the property crime in the state."
source: Transcript | The Meth Epidemic | FRONTLINE | PBS

Here's another find:

"Meth emerged as a drug of abuse in the United States in the 2000s. Oregon was one of the first states to experience broad meth addiction. During the early 2000s, Portland was a notorious center of meth use."
source: Meth’s Stubborn Persistence in Oregon

I'm not saying the number is accurate, but one can see how he might have believed it. Meth users are often prolific offenders and each one can be responsible for incredible amounts of crime.

 

[SiciC]

The no plan is why I feel like they didn’t have permission to take the camper truck or they told KM’s parents a different story of where they were going.

This was from a few pages ago but I was thinking, if Kam didn't have permission to take the camper truck (assuming it belonged to his family) but he took it and was gone for several days, his family probably would have become concerned and tried to contact and locate him, and even alerted authorities. But by all accounts, the teens weren't considered missing and no one suspected anything until the truck turned up burnt out and they were gone. So I think he did have permission to take it but were possibly told a misleading story of where he was going. We know Bryer told two different destinations to his father and grandmother (Alberta and Yukon). We haven't heard what Kam told his family about his departure. You'd think they might be concerned about their teenage son going on an extended trip with their camper and vehicle, with limited funds, with no plan on a destination or where he'd end up staying, and to find work in another province - which might end up fruitless. He was an adult I suppose, but he still lived at home and so was still probably quite dependent... They had to have been told a story of some sort of plan/destination. Maybe they thought he was just going on a camping trip, hence the camper.
Either way, I think he did have permission to take the camper & truck or the parents would've sounded the alarm sooner.
jmo

 

[SnooperDuper]

AS was granted supervised in the 8 years, he didn’t see BS? If there is a link to this, will you please provide it. I must have missed it.

Seems like he was given a choice between supervised access and no access, and in the end he chose no access.

"Schmegelsky Sr revealed that after his criminal conviction, his fortnightly visits to see his son were supervised by a social worker"
Father of teen Canadian murder fugitive tries to hijack media frenzy to publicize his new book | Daily Mail Online

"He has said that he did not see his son between the ages of eight and 16"
B.C. murder suspect's father reveals details of troubled life in book

 

[MistyWaters]

AS was granted supervised in the 8 years, he didn’t see BS? If there is a link to this, will you please provide it. I must have missed it.

I’m not sure what is the source of this information either.

There’s only two reasons I can think of for a father not to have any contact with a child for 10 years - either he chose not to participate in visitation whether supervised or not, or the mother was granted full custody with the Court issuing a No Contact order for the safety of both mom and child. We don’t know which was the case.

ETA - poor math, 8 years.

 

[Zella]

I think Kam had his family's blessing for the trip. Otherwise, Bryer wouldn't have been telling his grandma and his great-uncle the day before about the trip that they were leaving and where they were going. Even if Bryer's family didn't know Kam/didn't spend time with him, in a town as small as Port Alberni, that news could spread pretty fast. To the point that the McLeods may very well have heard it within hours that their son was leaving and been like, "What trip?"

 

[Vern]

I think the bottom line is that AS was alienated as a parent. Additionally, I think if he had gone through the court system present day, the outcome would have been very different. Regardless, of the harassment of his wife (if this were the case) he had a right to see his son. If there were legit concerns, supervised visits at the very least.

Presently, in the court systems, alienation of a parent MIGHT in the worse possible scenario lead to the loss of custody of their child by the alienating parent. Courts do not take too kindly to alienation and imo AS was alienated.

Exactly my thoughts and I'd put money on it; and, it happens way too often. I do believe there's an element of alienation that is highlight by how this all went down. When the boys were officially announced by the RCMP as being "Missing Persons" … AS found out by seeing it splashed all over the front pages of the paper. This tells us that the simple gesture of letting "dad" know of his missing status prior to the names becoming public did not occur. The RCMP would not have released such prior to the NOK (Next of Kin) being told and that NOK did not request that AS be notified prior too.

In my line of work's experience with the Feds, NOK are given the ability to notify extended family members prior to the release of information on/names of an individual into the public domain by the RCMP, DND etc. Remember, at the time, these boys were just "missing" and not "wanted" which is a whole different ballgame. Whoever the NOK was, and I have my suspicions, did not exercise the ability to make the notification, or have the RCMP make the notification on their behalf, to AS prior to the public announcement. What a horrific thing to find out via a newspaper's front page.

And, IMO, it is clear by watching the interviews with AS that he truly loved his child, cared deeply and is heartbroken by all of this pain caused to the victims, their families and the impact in his own life through the loss of his son.

My heart breaks for the victims, their families and AS.