Welcome to UnsolvedCanada.ca

This forum lists unsolved murders and missing people from Canada and other related discussions. If you wish to add a case, please create an account and add it, or send the information using the 'Contact' link on the top menu. Please Read The Rules Here.


Why are many people unwilling to provide tips to police that could solve a murder?

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
I am thinking of the Nathan O'Brien case - Where the alleged killer, not only murdered three people, but removed all three of them from a home. 

Why?  Why not leave all 3 there.  It would have been easier.  Just like Sonia's killer, DG took great risk in removing them from the house and transporting them possibly in his own vehicle, driving through town and outward. Why?
If we know the answer to that one, we may be able to figure out why Sonia's killer did the very same thing.
One thing we do know about DG is he definitely knew these three, very, very. well.

Quote Logical"How often do perps break in (walk in a unlocked door or to trespass , enter uninvited) in the middle of the night and attack, possibly rape and murder someone and then MOVE the body? Yes get in and attack and maybe murder and then get the hell outa dodge, but to move her........ Why?" unquote
That is a good question, and we have been struggling for a logical answer. And to take the time to clean up?  There was a lot of blood there (I think - at least according to the papers).  Rather than clean up - just remove her, which carries the most evidence?  ??? He didn't go out of his way to cover her remains either.  Just about 50 yards at most from a side road in amongst some reeds and stuff.  Sounds panicky to me, now that I think of it. And I wonder, if he even thought of DNA considering his situation.  :-\

Any thoughts anyone?

Hypothetically, If you killed someone in their home, why would you remove their body from their premises?
Under what circumstances or conditions would you feel that you had to do so? What would make you think that you had no other choice?
Thanks JB, Ok, then I guess it was at night but still why take her and not clean up? Why take the chance of carrying her out into a driveway of a townhouse complex? We assume she was wrapped in the sheets when removed, but the bedding was not found wrapped on her body but a distance away. Why take her and the sheets and not clean up, did the perp think his DNA could only be on these items? Is that why they were strewn across the ground and not hidden, they wanted the extremities to rid the evidence of eligible DNA on these items? Or at least be able to create doubt in evidence if used in court later?

How often do perps break in (walk in a unlocked door or to trespass , enter uninvited) in the middle of the night and attack, possibly rape and murder someone and then MOVE the body? Yes get in and attack and maybe murder and then get the hell outa dodge, but to move her........ Why?

Good thoughts Logical.  According to her Mom, Sonia's last call was on Sunday at 11:30 pm, from her on again, off again  bf, so she was alive and well then.

What if the murder was earlier in the day and the perp returned later in the dark of night? If the perp was known to be with her in the afternoon by someone/anyone, making the murder appear to have happened at night could give an alibi?

Could have left something incriminating and went back and then moved her body to hide his DNA? (Also time of death is more difficult once left outside above ground with no clothing or sheets to protect the body)Parked his vehicle at the tack shop or close, walked over? Left her car there when he went back for his vehicle (car, bike etc)

Why wrap and remove her body, move her car, but not clean up the murder scene? It was apparent to police that something bad happened inside the home.
Looks like this couple are in more trouble.  Due to the fact that they mishandled funds from other investors, this is the end result.  Beats me where they are ever going to come up with the money.

He is still out on bail for the alleged bombing murder of the disabled young mother who invested her money with him.


Enforcement Notice - Decision - IN THE MATTER OF Brian Andrew Malley and Christine Marie Malley - Discipline decision - Penalty

July 17, 2014 4:00 PM

 EDMONTON, July 17, 2014 /CNW/ - Following a disciplinary hearing held on March 3, 2014, in Edmonton, Alberta, a Hearing Panel of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) imposed the following penalties on Brian Andrew Malley and Christine Marie Malley:

Brian Andrew Malley:

(a)  A permanent ban from registration with IIROC in any capacity;

(b)  A fine of $300,000; and
c)  Costs of $35,000.

Christine Marie Malley:

(a)  A permanent ban from registration with IIROC in any capacity;

(b)  A fine of $250,000; and

(c)  Costs of $15,000.

The Hearing Panel's decision dated June 25, 2014, is available at:


At the disciplinary hearing, the Hearing Panel accepted the facts and allegations in the Notice of Hearing, as proven.

Documents related to ongoing IIROC enforcement proceedings – including Reasons and Decisions of Hearing Panels – are posted on the IIROC website as they become available. Click here to search and access all IIROC enforcement documents.

IIROC formally initiated the investigation into the conduct of Brian and Christine Malley in May 2012. The violations occurred when he was a Registered Representative and she was a Branch Manager with the Red Deer branch of Assante Capital Management Ltd., an IIROC-regulated firm.  Brian and Christine Malley are no longer registrants with an IIROC-regulated firm.

Here is the ending to this very tragic marriage.


May 24, 2014 6:34 pm   
David Woods appeals first-degree murder conviction

SASKATOON – A little more than a week after being found guilty of first-degree murder in the death of his wife, David Woods is appealing his conviction.

Global News received confirmation that an appeal was filed on Friday with the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

Woods, 51, was given a life sentence with no chance of parole for 25 years in the death of his wife, Dorothy.

I don't know if this was ever posted before :


I wonder if LE ever publicly acknowledged again that they stand behind the theory she met her killer on a dating site?  I don’t remember it being brought up again in any news conferences or articles.

If she was dating and meeting men, it's possible she's not going to tell her friends and family this information.  Some people like to keep certain parts of their life private even when family/friends think they really know a person. I am not saying she was up to no good or hiding some big secret. At the same time it says she had an “off and on again” boyfriend, too. Why was she on POF if she was already in a relationship?

 Perhaps this holds the key as to why she was murdered and why she was on that site. Did jealousy/rage get the best of the killer?  Did someone she had met online somehow find out that Sonia had an on and off again boyfriend, had been in her house before, knew the entrances and exits, knew Orangeville, the back roads etc . Driving Sonia’s car is VERY personal and I think gives us an indication that the killer felt like he had the right to kill her, and a right to use her car to drive her to her final resting place.  Plus he had to have known where she kept her car keys. I am not sure if we have a serial killer here. The evidence suggests 50/50. Driving her vehicle with her in it to dispose of the body suggests we have a serial killer but at the same time DNA left behind and the boot prints shows that we may not have a serial killer on our hands?!  (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/disturbed/201311/how-serial-killers-get-away-their-murders)
 As per that article it would make sense that the reason for removing her body was so that evidence would have the chance to decay so as to not make a positive victim ID which would mean he becomes even harder to find, more time to establish an alibi, and leave the area. I highly doubt he planned on her being found so soon or even found at all.

Serial killer or not, it was not the first time he was with her in her home, he was wearing boots (odd for August weather if not worn for the workplace), put himself in extremely risky/vulnerable positions (driving her car, coming out front door with her body in the sheets), and knew where she kept her car keys.
Serial Killers In Canada / Re: Cody Alan Legebokoff - Prince George, BC
« Last post by Kazoo on August 28, 2014, 10:05:40 AM »
Crown challenges 'involved' defence

Crown prosecutor Joseph Temple worked to cast doubt on Cody Allan Legebokoff's account of the deaths of the three woman and one teenage girl he is accused of murdering during cross examination Wednesday at the Prince George courthouse.

When he testified in his defence on Tuesday, Legebokoff maintained that - while he was "involved" in the killings of Jill Stacey Stuchenko, 35, Cynthia Frances Maas, 35, and Natasha Lynn Montgomery, 23 - three people he has only identified as X, Y and Z committed the actual murders.

As for Loren Donn Leslie, the partially blind 15-year-old girl found Nov. 27, 2010 in the snow near a gravel pit north of Vanderhoof, Legebokoff conceded he did strike her in the head with a pipe wrench but has not admitted killing her.

The day-long exchange Wednesday before a 14-person jury and about 50 onlookers from the gallery was often confrontational as Temple challenged Legebokoff's version of the events. More than once, Temple asserted Legebokoff committed the murders and made up the story about X, Y and Z with the accused replying "no, I did not."

Legebokoff was also combative and testy as Temple tried to tease details out of him, providing terse answers to questions about what people were wearing, where they were positioned and sequences of events.

"I didn't take observations or take notes or anything on how he did it, which way he did it, or how far the cut went or how deep the cut was, I didn't take those kind of observations," Legebokoff protested when pressed on his contention he handed Z a kitchen knife to finish off Montgomery after X had beaten her with a steel bar while chasing her through Legebokoff's apartment.

Temple highlighted apparent discrepancies between what Legebokoff had to say and the evidence that had been presented during the trial, which began June 2.

He said Legebokoff's assertion that X had struck Montgomery at the end of the hallway and just after she got out of the bathroom failed to account for her blood found splattered all over his bedroom.

Temple also noted that contrary to Legebokoff's contention that Leslie stabbed herself while immediately in front of his pickup truck, her blood and her iPod were found some distance away, suggesting he had chased her.

On that point, Temple noted that when Legebokoff was talking to police during the two days after his arrest in November 2010, he said Leslie was "trying to make a run" and suggested Legebokoff had stopped himself short of adding the words "for it," because that would indicate he was pursuing her.

Legebokoff had told the court Leslie went "flying off the handle" and hit herself with a pipe wrench and then stabbed herself with a utility tool knife she somehow found in the cab of his truck. Temple suggested opening a utility tool can be complicated and yet Legebokoff gave no account of performing the motions to get a knife out.

When Temple said evidence showed Leslie's ring finger was broken, suggesting she was trying to protect herself while he hit her with the pipe wrench, Legebokoff said he had stepped on her hands in the process of dragging her away.

"With running shoes?" Temple asked.

"A 250-pound guy stepping on her and rocks being underneath the snow, yeah," Legebokoff replied.

Temple also said the significant amount of blood from Stuchenko that was found on Legebokoff's couch conflicted with his story that X had struck her with a pipe and suggested that in actual fact he committed the murder.

"You hit her on the head, you stunned her, you punched her just as you described Mr. X did, and then you stabbed her in the neck and then you watched while she bled to death on your couch and then you took her body out in your truck and tried to bury her in the gravel pit," Temple said.

Legebokoff replied with a denial.

Stuchenko's body was found Oct. 20, 2009 in a gravel pit near Foothills Boulevard and Otway Road.

A fair amount of time was devoted to Temple going through the interviews Legebokoff gave police, with the accused agreeing that he had not been telling Mounties the truth. Temple implied that Legebokoff was still lying when he presented his latest story to the jury and drew on the similarities between an initial story he gave police and his claim X, Y and Z committed the murders.

When police noticed blood in his truck after he was pulled over on the night of Nov. 27, 2010 along Highway 27, he first told RCMP a friend, Thomas Russell, had shot a deer and that Legebokoff then used a pipe wrench to beat it and then a utility tool knife to kill it.

Legebokoff agreed with Temple that the story was a "complete fabrication." Temple went on to describe similarities between that story and the ones he gave about the deaths of Stuchenko, Maas and Montgomery.

"Of course, the important thing about it is that the main actor in each case, Mr. X or Thomas Russell, has vanished into the night, leaving Mr. Legebokoff to tell the tale to the police," Temple said.

Temple told Legebokoff the positions of Leslie's and Maas' bodies were found in were similar (both with their pants and underwear down around their ankles) and contended that's because he dragged the two into the bush in similar fashions, which Legebokoff also denied.

Temple questioned the credibility of other aspects of Legebokoff's story, including the assertion that X killed Stuchenko over the October 2009 Thanksgiving long weekend in the basement suite of the Prince George home where Legebokoff had been living for only a short time after moving from Fort St. James.

"You expect the jury to believe that you were so trusted by this drug dealer that he was willing to commit a murder in your presence after only a month-and-a-half's acquaintance, that's your evidence?" Temple asked Legebokoff, who replied with a yes.

Although Temple said no DNA evidence was found, Legebokoff continued to maintain he twice had sex with Leslie on the night her body was found. Temple replied that Legebokoff had attacked Leslie because she refused to have sex with him.

Even if the story about X, Y and Z was true, Temple suggested Legebokoff remained in deep trouble because he supplied the murder weapon in all three instances and despite knowing what the perpetrators planned to do with them.

"I was also under the influence of drugs at that time and wasn't really [with it]," Legebokoff replied when Temple once again touched on the story about Montgomery. "I just passed him the knife."

As he did on Tuesday, Legebokoff continued to refuse to provide the names of the three men he said killed Stuchenko, Maas and Montgomery. Legebokoff had said he did not want to go to prison with the reputation as a "rat" by giving their names.

In response, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Glen Parrett said an application for contempt of court against Legebokoff will be heard at the trial's conclusion.

Closing arguments from Crown prosecution and defence counsels will begin Tuesday, September 2, 2014.

© Copyright 2014
Edmonton / Re: Remains discovered in Hobbema
« Last post by SAP on August 28, 2014, 09:11:56 AM »
Some people who cannot stand it living like that have just left for distant places. I think other reserves are facing the same kind of turmoil. One lady I know has left a reserve west of Edmonton and tried to get her family out of there too after her dtr was found shot in the head. Many of them have royalties of one form or another coming in and the gang life is ripe. I don't think there is an easy solution as cuts keep being made to policing. This country of ours makes cuts in the most important sectors.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10

A garden of tears: the murder of Kathryn-Mary Herbert

A casefile of events and story related to the 1975 murder of Kathryn Mary Herbert (Sutton).

Click Here