Canada - Lucas Fowler, Chynna Deese, and Leonard Dyck, all murdered, Alaska Hwy, BC, Jul 2019 #19

[Lalalacasbah]

According to the police statement below, RCMP is committed to creating a report with the totality of the investigations, and will share it first with the families, and later the release to the public. I imagine once their report complete, they will archive any evidence according to policy.

RCMP: Teen suspects in northern B.C. murders died by suicide, with guns found nearby

The B.C. RCMP have engaged the force’s Behavioural Analysis Unit and Mounties will review all the evidence and timelines, said the police statement.

“The B.C. RCMP commits that once we have completed that review within the next few weeks, we will be providing the families with an update with respect to the totality of the investigations and then releasing the information publicly,” said the statement.

Very curious what this will entail.

And call me a stickler, but I feel this report or document or whatever the process is that is provided as closure should state charges along with evidence.

I guess I would find it insulting to the victims to just have it all "disappear" and the suspects not be deemed and proved murderers when/if in fact they are, all MOO.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

Imo, an inquest into the deaths of each victim would allocate blame to K & B, but first, the RCMP would have to produce evidence that K & B are responsible before the inquests are held. There would be an inquest into the deaths of K & B too because it is suicide. There were no witnesses to any of the deaths of these victims or suspects, so it'd be in the family and public's interest to hold an inquest and close it.


An inquest is a public hearing conducted by a coroner before a jury of five community members. Inquests are held for the purpose of informing the public about the circumstances of a death. Although the jury’s conclusions are not binding, it is hoped that any recommendations suggested, if implemented, will prevent further deaths.

......
The inquest has its origins in 11th century England. When a body was found, a representative of the Crown had to decide five things:

• Who was the deceased?
• Where did he or she die?
• When did he or she die?
• How did he or she die?
• Who was to blame?

(Note: blame can no longer be assigned by inquest)

The five questions
There are five questions that must be answered when investigating a death:

• Who was the deceased?
• Where did the death occur?
• When did the death occur?
• How did the death occur (i.e. the medical cause)?
• By what means did the death occur?(i.e. the classification or manner of death: natural, suicide, accident, homicide or undetermined)
  Discretionary inquests may be held when:
  
  
  • the coroner determines that enough information is known from death investigation to support an inquest
  • the coroner decides that it is desirable for the public to have an open and full hearing of the circumstance of a death
  • if the coroner believes a jury could make useful recommendations to prevent further deaths
  A relative of a deceased may request an inquest by submitting a request in writing to the investigating coroner. The request will be presented to the Regional Supervising Coroners management team to determine whether an inquest should be conducted.
  
  There is no time limit between the date of death and the convening of an inquest.
  
  An inquest is NOT an adversarial process. It is also neither a trial, nor a process for discovery. It is not a royal commission, a campaign or crusade directed by personal or philosophical agendas. An inquest is an inquisitorial process designed to focus public attention on the circumstances of a death.

Inquests | Ministry of the Solicitor General

Good info, thank you! And the comment from the retired RCMP investigator in my previous post said more info would probably be revealed from an inquest as opposed to a trial. So guess we will wait to see what information is revealed.

 

[SovereignSnake]

So after an odd couple of days, I somehow happened upon the RCMP Press Conference from August 7th. I have no idea how I missed this conference but given all the videos, photos and articles out there, small wonder it got lost in the fray. Anyway, so I watched it and once again some of the careful wording stuck out to me. At one point Assistant Commissioner Hackett says they have definitive evidence linking the two crime scenes. Now what did he mean by that? Upon first hearing him say that, I was under the impression he meant they found Kam and Bryer's bodies with two guns and a cellphone so we have all the evidence we need to tie them to all three murders. I'm really surprised he said this without any of the ballistic reports or forensics being completed. I mean they had only just found their bodies hours before the conference. It's one of several reasons I'm still unconvinced about the connection. Again, yes, I could be completely wrong but something just seems... off? Hackett made it sound very forgone conclusion and matter of fact.. I'm incredibly curious as to what else was discovered that linked the two crime scenes. Something we're completely unaware of perhaps. Yes, it was also disclosed in the conference that Leonard's family asked that his cause of death not be revealed or discussed. (Credit to @NJSleuth91 for mentioning that in response to one of my comments a few days ago.) Now, I get that the family does not want it to be the topic of media and public speculation at all, but Hackett also said it was not an "operational necessity." Again, why? I just think that if Leonard's death was by gunfire then that would be very pertinent information. It's just really strange wording they used in that conference much like the one when they announced Kam and Bryer were suspects. I can see why Hackett takes most of the questions in these press conferences. He's clever. Also, I get this is Canada and not the US but it seems like something they would want everyone to be aware of even ahead of the final report. However, as I and others have speculated perhaps Leonard's death was not a result of gun violence but something else entirely. In any event I'll link the video for anyone else who may have missed it.

 

[srper2]

In the video at approx 2.30 he said that they still need to confirm that the evidentiary findings they have collected continue to confirm their investigative theory and eliminates any other possibility or suspects.

I am waiting to see what the evidence is that has led RCMP to decide that CM and BS killed CD and LF. This statement makes me feel that they may be still working to find the links.

 

[Pyecraft]

If slaughter of innocents on a Provincial highway doesn't warrant an inquiry, the laws need to be changed. Else, how can we, the BC taxpayer whose contributions help fund local law enforcement, believe our families and friends are now safe on road trips. Personally, I've always felt it suspicious when told 'only whats good for you'. Facts relevant to public safety should not be held secret; an informed public opinion cannot be formed otherwise.

Yet.... an 'ongoing' rcmp investigation could easily be compromised should relevant information from another case be leaked. Surely then, this is one of those circumstances the rcmp find themselves in with a simple case closed but its facts hampering an ongoing one. Otherwise, I can see no reason for delaying a conclusive report unless making the facts fit is proving awkward.

Investigating these crimes would have led them down other pathways. Stating that as a fact for not revealing certain information regarding the butchery would be marginally acceptable though it wouldn't stop conspiracy theories sprout. Amid the present rcmp silence they bloom anyway.

Its unclear to me what our rcmp expect from the general public. When out of ideas, they appeal for the public's help as witnesses, despite risks involved to ordinary folk from coming forward. But when we ask if its 'safe to go out yet?' we are told 'mind yer own business' and 'we'll let you know when we feel like it'.

Integrity would have them simply answering 'sorry we don't really know, best you stay home'.

 

[Grouper]

What still leaves me very curious is how fast and forcefully the rcmp moved in on Bryer and Kam. They brought in the army at one point, what seemed to be very early on.

They called them “extremely dangerous” and advised the public not to approach them. And yet, in all witness reports, they were described as shy and docile, if a little paranoid.

As far as I am aware, this is not the first time murders have occurred and the suspects have fled, but I have never seen such an intense response from the rcmp, ever.

Just some observations I’ve made that have been bugging me. Granted, I also understand the gravity of two people committing three murders in a short period of time, and how that would lead them to label B and K as “dangerous” and “unapproachable”.

I just wish I had more insight on what made rcmp believe they were such a huge threat to the public. From all evidence I’ve seen, they were two people who potentially committed sloppy and confused (willfully neglectful or covering up evidence) crimes and then ran away in fear of capture. Sorry if this is a poorly thought out post, writing as I get ready for work.

 

[NJSleuth91]

Surely then, this is one of those circumstances the rcmp find themselves in with a simple case closed but its facts hampering an ongoing one. Otherwise, I can see no reason for delaying a conclusive report unless making the facts fit is proving awkward.

SBM

Who says the report is delayed? They said it would be a few weeks. It's been a few weeks. Bureaucracy always takes much longer than originally planned. Not to mention a lot of investigators were on vacation last month, as they told a journalist last week.

As far as I am aware, this is not the first time murders have occurred and the suspects have fled, but I have never seen such an intense response from the rcmp, ever.

SBM

It's most likely because they killed two people from other countries and it became international news, and one of them was the son of a very high-ranking police officer. JMO.

 

[sandbar]

What still leaves me very curious is how fast and forcefully the rcmp moved in on Bryer and Kam. They brought in the army at one point, what seemed to be very early on.

They called them “extremely dangerous” and advised the public not to approach them. And yet, in all witness reports, they were described as shy and docile, if a little paranoid.

As far as I am aware, this is not the first time murders have occurred and the suspects have fled, but I have never seen such an intense response from the rcmp, ever.

Just some observations I’ve made that have been bugging me. Granted, I also understand the gravity of two people committing three murders in a short period of time, and how that would lead them to label B and K as “dangerous” and “unapproachable”.

I just wish I had more insight on what made rcmp believe they were such a huge threat to the public. From all evidence I’ve seen, they were two people who potentially committed sloppy and confused (willfully neglectful or covering up evidence) crimes and then ran away in fear of capture. Sorry if this is a poorly thought out post, writing as I get ready for work.

For all we know they could have left cellphone videos at every scene.

 

[Grouper]

For all we know they could have left cellphone videos at every scene.

....you mean, a cellphone at every scene? Or took videos of every scene with one phone? I think a cellphone left at each scene (so three phones) would be a little bit extravagant but at this point I can’t rule anything out anymore

Who knows.

 

[CanadianSleuther]

They called them “extremely dangerous” and advised the public not to approach them. And yet, in all witness reports, they were described as shy and docile, if a little paranoid.

This also had stuck out for me too. This makes me think like they may have saw something they should've or the death regarding Leonard was an accident and they were scared and took off, and trying to act as natural as possible.

 

[Pyecraft]

Who says the report is delayed? They said it would be a few weeks. It's been a few weeks. Bureaucracy always takes much longer than originally planned. Not to mention a lot of investigators were on vacation last month, as they told a journalist last week.

What is so unreasonable, given the public concern and savagery of the crimes, to expect the rcmp to issue a simple, brief confirmation that the two suspects committed the three atrocities; supporting evidence will be made public, paraphrasing your comment NJ, 'when bureaucracy permits'.

A minor courtesy, if indeed they believe their quarry guilty; there's no further danger to the public.

 

[NJSleuth91]

What is so unreasonable, given the public concern and savagery of the crimes, to expect the rcmp to issue a simple, brief confirmation that the two suspects committed the three atrocities; supporting evidence will be made public, paraphrasing your comment NJ, 'when bureaucracy permits'.

A minor courtesy, if indeed they believe their quarry guilty; there's no further danger to the public.

They said there was no threat to the public, I think on August 5th, before their bodies were even found but the RCMP found something that convinced them they were dead.

They said there was "significant evidence" linking the three murders during the press conference on August 7th and that they "had no reason to believe there were any other suspects."

 

[SnooperDuper]

What is so unreasonable, given the public concern and savagery of the crimes, to expect the rcmp to issue a simple, brief confirmation that the two suspects committed the three atrocities; supporting evidence will be made public, paraphrasing your comment NJ, 'when bureaucracy permits'.

A minor courtesy, if indeed they believe their quarry guilty; there's no further danger to the public.

RCMP already charged the two for LD's murder and announced that they were suspects in the others. What more do people need right now?

They will complete their investigation, then announce the conclusion NOT announce their conclusion, then complete the investigation.

 

[CanadianSleuther]

All I know is the families of all the victims, and the families of the suspect deserve some kind of conclusion.

 

[Moriarty]

They called them “extremely dangerous” and advised the public not to approach them. And yet, in all witness reports, they were described as shy and docile, if a little paranoid.

This also had stuck out for me too. This makes me think like they may have saw something they should've or the death regarding Leonard was an accident and they were scared and took off, and trying to act as natural as possible.

SBM

For me, this says the opposite. The RCMP believed KM and BS killed Lucas and Chynna, and we don't know the details of why that happened, but perhaps ion the course of another crime such as robbery.

But THEN... RCMP believe KM and BS kill Leonard to steal his car and flee eastwards. To the RCMP, these two are not just two would-be robbers or something who may have accidentally killed the couple in the panic and heat of the moment. This says to me the RCMP believe these two will kill to help themselves escape police. This makes them a possible danger to anyone who crosses their path, so the RCMP call them "extremely dangerous."

 

[SnooperDuper]

All I know is the families of all the victims, and the families of the suspect deserve some kind of conclusion.

Yes, and it should be backed by rock-solid investigated facts.

No one should push the RCMP to release anything before they have completed a thorough investigation. Jumping the gun and releasing partial information that raises questions or doubts would be a disservice to the families of all who died.

 

[FactFinder3000]

Yes, and it should be backed by rock-solid investigated facts.

No one should push the RCMP to release anything before they have completed a thorough investigation. Jumping the gun and releasing partial information that raises questions or doubts would be a disservice to the families of all who died.

There would be no harm in releasing whatever solid information they have so far. Facts are facts. Release them already. The longer they wait, the more time people have to speculate.

 

[Grouper]

Yes, and it should be backed by rock-solid investigated facts.

No one should push the RCMP to release anything before they have completed a thorough investigation. Jumping the gun and releasing partial information that raises questions or doubts would be a disservice to the families of all who died.

Agreed. Perhaps I’m just being too impatient. I understand they have a lot to work though, and the case is being watched over by Australia and America as well. It must add a lot of extra red tape, I imagine.

 

[SnooperDuper]

There would be no harm in releasing whatever solid information they have so far. Facts are facts. Release them already. The longer they wait, the more time people have to speculate.

Releasing partial information is not going to stop people from speculating: to the contrary, it may just add fuel to the fire.

 

[SovereignSnake]

If Kam and Bryer did indeed kill Lucas and Chynna I would really like to know what happened in Dease Lake four days later that scared them so much? Why was it complete silence until Thursday afternoon the 18th, then whatever went down on Friday the 19th. For example; did an RCMP patrol stop at their little campsite on Hwy 37 and talk to Kam and Bryer on say Thursday afternoon or Friday morning? Maybe they were even asked to move? How long was it said you can camp in those pullouts, like 24-48 hours? Something must have given Kam and Bryer a red flag? Enough so, they kill Leonard, abandon (and burn) virtually all of their earthly possessions, including their temporary home and make a hasty retreat in an unfamiliar, smaller, stolen vehicle. Then as others mentioned, they didn't hurt another person (but had several opportunities to do so) and anyone who did encounter them said they were quiet, timid and paranoid. I've not heard "polite" used verbatim, but from what I've observed I think they still had common courtesy say if they were in gas stations, restaurants, stores, etc. I have to wonder how many other people out there met them and didn't report it or had no idea who they even were. Perhaps if they did encounter an RCMP officer prior to stealing Leonard's RAV that officer didn't report it either? One more thing, I keep wondering where they spent Sunday night the 21st. I know some speculated they went through Flin Flon but my instincts tell me they stayed the night some were round The Pas, Manitoba. Either is entirely possible though.
~All opinion and speculation as always.