Thanks whiterhino for your post. Here are some details I've pulled from Jon Wells' article at https://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/2215939-who-is-audrey-gleave pertinent to some of the recent posts, as well as some reflections from previous discussions: I recall that there has been a lot of chat both about "overkill" and "staging" over the years in relation to this case. (The discussion on the latter had to do with possibility of diverting attention from another motive -- for example, financial -- with focus on the "sexual component" and "trophy".) OTH: we do have that eery prediction from her ex (the third and last husband) that she would be sexually assaulted and murdered in her home. Because this came true, it's urgent that we consider on what grounds she would make such a stunning statement. Of whom was she afraid??? From the Wells story: "She was also a private woman who volunteered little about her past. Maybe that was because she was older than her peers, or perhaps something had happened to her as a young woman that inspired such caution." And: "He was one of several people on her email contact list [this refers to her friend John H]. She emailed each person separately, never as a group. It was a privacy thing. More unusual was Audrey’s insistence that anyone emailing refer to her as Baryon, or Bary, even within the text of a message. She made it clear if you wrote her real first name, at any time, you would be cut off." She lived in a remote area, with the protection of 2 very large dogs (sadly, in the end, these dogs could not protect her). She was so very careful -- one might say to an extreme; many of us here might even use, if cautiously, the term "paranoid" for her fear of being "named" in email. AGAIN the question: of what, of whom, was she so fearful? Did she fear being email hacked? Remember that she took classes as a senior at Mohawk in computer studies (also from the link above) .... What do we know about those 2 exhubbies, prior to Allen? Were they living? in Hamilton area? The second from "in her 20s" is named in the article. I don't recall if we ever discovered who the first ex was? Is it possible -- to offer another motive -- that she discovered something via her computer and internet knowledge that put her in danger? from Wells: "She became a computer whiz, ultimately asking a friend to email her viruses so she could study them, break them down." I recall there was a similar vein of discussion re: danger related to work/knowledge from her connection to Chalk River and nuclear energy; she DID leave her graduate studies in physics somewhat abruptly (at least, as intimated in the Wells' piece). For the third time: what was it from Audrey's past that required her to be so careful -- (I recall articles where friends reiterated you'd be "cut off" -- she would cease all contact -- f you violated her rule to not name her in email....) While it might be fair to say many elderly women living alone may feel cause to be careful for their safety, I think most of us would agree Audrey's behaviour is not a norm. And that prediction! It remains enormously chilling and warrants substantive inquiry amidst the sea of other possibilities. Also from the link above, in relation to the garage and dogs, and murder weapon: "The garage was attached to the house. Audrey’s two German shepherds had been inside, apparently unable to save her." "He spoke of a vicious stabbing but did not talk about other weapons — at least one other had been used" We don't know if the dogs were crated, but we do know they were not in the garage to protect her. Again our Qs are: was she surprised in the garage -- for example, while going out to have a smoke? Or was she meeting someone she knew or didn't fear, hence keeping the dogs in the house to avoid a "commotion"? I can't believe this coming month marks another devastating anniversary of not knowing.