Canadian True Crime - The Murder of Richard Humble

Episode Date: January 15, 2021

82-year old Richard Humble needed knee surgery, but because he lived alone, he would need a caregiver to help him as he recovered. An old friend recommended someone who might be able to help him—but what she ended up doing was the exact opposite.*Please note - some names in this episode have been changed to protect the privacy of innocent parties. Any links between names chosen and real people involved in the story are coincidental. Look out for early, ad-free release on CTC premium feeds: available on Amazon Music (included with Prime), Apple Podcasts, Patreon and Supercast. Full list of resources, information sources, credits and music credits:See the page for this episode at www.canadiantruecrime.ca/episodes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Please note, some names in this episode have been changed to protect privacy, and any links found between the names chosen and real people involved in this story are coincidental. Canadian True Crime is a completely independent production, funded through advertising and direct donations. The podcast contains coarse language, adult themes, and content of a violent and disturbing nature. Listener discretion is advised. It was early 2011, and Richard Humble needed knee surgery. The 82-year-old was proudly independent and lived by himself, but the knee surgery would affect his mobility,

so he needed to figure out how he was going to get by as he recovered. See, Richard was born in the UK in 1928, and all his family still lived either in the UK or in Europe. Before he moved to Canada, Richard took an apprenticeship working on British Navy ships and became a marine engineer. He was a clever man, a dedicated seaman who loved nothing more than traveling the world and taking in new sites. But this world traveling didn't leave much time for the more traditional aspirations of life,

that is, finding a partner, settling down, having a family. Richard remained fiercely independent, but he never forgot about his family, especially his mother and his sister Joyce. He would often bring special gifts home for them from interesting places he'd visited. In the 1950s, when Richard was in his 20s, he travelled to Canada and fell in love with the country immediately. He decided to move to Ontario permanently and make it his new home. His nephew would say, quote, He thought this was the best place on the planet.

With Richard's experience with and love of all things boating and the water, he soon secured a position working on the fireboats in Toronto. Fireboats are like floating fire engines, specialized watercraft designed to fight fires found on ships and boats, as well as the shoreline. Richard was so happy working on these fireboats that he stayed there for 22 years until he retired. He considered himself a proud.

Canadian. Richard wanted to retire in nature, so he moved up to the small community of Wichago, about an hour and a half's drive northeast of Toronto. Richard loved the waterways, the gorgeous natural scenery, and the peace and quiet that comes along with rural life. There was also a great sense of community there which Richard enjoyed. In his retirement, he continued to live independently and was known to be kind, generous and handy. With his marine engineer skills,

he could fix almost anything. So often, neighbours would pop over with their own broken household items, like lawnmowers, knowing that Richard would be able to help fix them. But Richard's independence was in jeopardy. In early 2011, the 82-year-old was booked in to have knee surgery,

and he would need some help to do household chores and run errands for a while. Richard's nephew would say that he was a very proud man, and after a lifetime of total independence, it probably took a lot for him to accept that he needed help. In fact, it likely caused him great pain. He was proud of the fact that he still cooked his own meals, did his own cleaning, and still drove his car. But in this case, Richard really had no choice,

and it was only going to be a temporary problem until he'd recovered. Luckily, one of his old friends had a solution. His 46-year-old daughter, Linda, was currently out of work and looking to earn some money. She could help out as a temporary caregiver. Because this recommendation came from an old friend, Richard trusted that this woman would be a good fit for her. him and his needs while he recovered from surgery. Linda needed some income and Richard needed someone to help.

It could be a win-win for them both, at least for a few weeks. Richard said yes. The arrangement was that Linda would help out around the house with cleaning and general chores and she would also drive Richard for medical appointments and to run his errands. But what Richard didn't know was that Linda had. problems and soon her problems would become his problem. I'm Christy an Australian who's called Canada home for more than a decade and this is my passion project. Join me to hear about some of the most thought-provoking and often heartbreaking true-crime

cases in Canada. Using court documents and news archives I take you through each story from beginning to end with a look at the way the media covered the crime and the impact it had on the community. This is Canadian true crime. Linda Brown grew up in Mississauga, a city considered part of the Greater Toronto area. Not much as publicly known about her childhood or adolescence, but court documents paint a vivid picture of events from her adult life.

In 1999, Linda lost her job, and she became entangled in a wrongful dismissal legal battle with her former employer. This was an expensive process, and Linda went to her brother John and his wife to ask them to loan her nearly $200,000 so she could pay her legal bills. They agreed to help her out. The case went through the court system for eight years. According to court documents, Linda had a spouse at around this time, and she also gave birth to a son.

A year after that, in 2007, she finally received a settlement from her former employer. But she didn't use the money to pay her brother back. In fact, she didn't pay them anything. $200,000 is no small sum of money, and John and his wife Mary generously gave her some grace for about a year before starting to actively pursue collection of that money in 2009.

They called Linda and they tried to visit her, and while she made a lot of promises that the repayment was coming, she was skilled at giving excuses for not paying and making up reasons for not being able to see them face to face when they requested it. Court documents reveal that in the months after John and Mary had started to put the pressure on, they received a letter from Ronald Chapman,

the lawyer who had represented Linda in her wrongful dismissal suit. The court document didn't publish the full contents of the letter. All that's publicly known is that it was addressed to John, Linda's brother, and made a vague reference to an amount of almost $420,000. Neither John nor Mary had any idea what this amount was. Linda owed them $200,000, a little less than half of that amount. Two weeks later, they received another letter from the lawyer's office. When they opened it, they saw that it was actually addressed to Linda,

and it seemed to imply that she was still owed a lot of money as a result of her wrongful dismissal suit. Maybe it was that $420,000 referred to in the last letter. This second letter referred to a phone conversation where Linda's lawyer advised her that the Department of Justice was considering stepping in to pay her the money that was still owed to her by her former employer. The letter went on to say that the Department of Justice planned to recover those funds from the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA, Canada's Tax Administrator.

The letter also referenced another discussion that Linda had had with her lawyer regarding her sister-in-law, Mary. The letter specified that the lawyer had advised that the lawyer had advised, advise Linda to let Mary know about the kind of people she was dealing with, quote, and specifically Ms. Ruchetto's schizophrenia. Confused? So was Mary. She had never heard of this person, let alone the fact that she supposedly had schizophrenia. Nor did Mary have any idea what any of this random information had to do with the money she and John were trying to recover from his sister. The letter then

referred to the various people apparently involved with helping Linda to get her payout, insinuating that they were very knowledgeable and capable of dealing with the recovery, which was in conjunction with the Department of Justice and the Privacy Commissioner. Mary raised her eyebrows. This was the first she had ever heard about the Privacy Commissioner being involved. Now, in the two weeks between receiving each of these letters, Mary and John had been trying to say, up more appointments with Linda, but as usual, something always came up. She always had an excuse.

The overall impression the letter gave was that John and Mary need not worry. Their money was coming, the people dealing with the matter were experienced and knew what they were doing, and it was out of Linda's hands. Ergo, John and Mary needn't actively chase Linda down for the money anymore. According to the court document, by this time, John was so frustrated dealing with his sister that he decided to do as the letter suggested and stopped the chase. But Mary didn't agree. She was really skeptical about these letters. Both were printed on lawyer Ronald Chapman's letterhead and was signed by him, but something seemed off. Some of the paragraphs weren't in alignment, some of the jargon used wasn't that of a lawyer,

and there were some odd grammar and punctuation choices. That was in April of 2009. Later that year, John and Mary were shocked to learn that Linda's own house caught on fire and burned to the ground. Arson investigators were called in on strong suspicions, but no cause for the fire was ever found. Linda received an insurance payout, of $500,000. John and Mary were sure that she would pay them back now, but she didn't.

Just over a year later, it was early 2011, and Linda was in serious financial strife again. John and Mary had watched her burn through two separate payouts now, one from the wrongful dismissal and now the house insurance payout. They were fed up and breathing down her neck to get their money back. And Linda was behind on the mortgage payments for her own house. It's not known what she spent the payout money on or what the situation was with her spouse, although court documents gave the impression that their relationship broke down at some point, and eventually her spouse would obtain a child support order and their property would go into careers. But before that, in early 2011, is when Linda Brown became Richard Humble's caregiver.

Her father was a good friend of Richards with a decades-old friendship that began when Richard retired to Wechago. And while Linda's father knew that she was out of work and he likely knew about her personal and financial issues since it involved her brother John, he couldn't have known what was going to happen when he recommended that she be Richard's caregiver. At first, Richard had been using a service to help with his chores and errands, and Linda cancelled those services so she could take on those tasks instead as his full-time caregiver. Richard still insisted on cooking his own meals, though, something he was very proud of. They both knew that their working together was only temporary, probably five or six weeks,

in total until Richard had healed from surgery. That was early March. On April 9, Richard's neighbours saw smoke coming out of his house. They ran over and heard him calling, Help me from inside the house, but he sounded weak. One of his neighbours, Janice, risked her own life by entering Richard's house and crawling through the thick black smoke on her hands and knees until she found him, crumpled on the floor.

A semi-conscious body is not easy to move, and Janice wasn't able to budge him. She tried until she gasped for air, and then she had no choice but to crawl back to get help. But when she got to the door, she realized it had locked behind her and she couldn't get back out again. Terrified, she banged on the door and screamed for help.

Two other neighbors happened to be outside, and managed to kick in the door, letting Janice out to catch her breath. One of them, Mike, entered the fire-strickened house, determined to drag Richard out through smoke so thick now that the only possible movement was army crawling close to the ground. With another neighbour holding his ankles for support, all three made it out just as the burning home began to moan and crack,

as the weight and heat of the fire wrestled with the structure of the house. 82-year-old Richard Humble was alive and partially conscious. He moaned in pain. He had suffered terrible burns so much so that his clothing had burned completely off. He was rushed to hospital, but tragically it was too late. He died a few hours later, with extensive burns to 85% of his. his body. After Richard's death, Linda was quick to produce a will, explaining that Richard just happened to have changed his will on March 31st, nine days before the house fire that caused

his death. The new will made Linda the main beneficiary of his estate, replacing his beloved sister Joyce, who had been on that will for decades. Richard was still very close with his family in the UK, and none of them had any knowledge about this massive change in his will. The only person who had any knowledge of it was Linda. Four days after the house fire, Richard's lawyer received a letter that was also dated March 31st, 2011. The same day he apparently signed his new will. The letter informed his solicitor of changes to his will. It stated that the previous will was now void

and requested that all documents the solicitor held on the matter be sent to him. Things appeared a little suspicious, but Linda was also able to produce documents that gave credibility to his new will. She also had continuing power of attorney for property and personal care for Richard, which were both signed by him and dated March 24, 2011, six days before the will. With these documents, Linda could begin a claim on his home insurance right away. The police went door-knocking in the neighbourhood to speak to Richard's neighbours

and find out if they saw or knew anything. It didn't take them long to discover something else that was highly suspicious. Linda's vehicle was seen at Richard's house about 15 minutes before smoke was seen billowing out of it. Her explanation for this sighting, if any, is not publicly available. And then her vehicle was gone, as Richard's neighbours realised his plight and risked their own lives to try and save him. Janice, the first neighbour who crawled into the burning house, told police that Linda spoke to her two days after the fire and said something that made her uncomfortable. Linda advised her that she had power of attorney over Richard and therefore the authority to sell the property, his property. And then Janice reflected on how Linda had the audacity to ask if Janice's husband would be interested in rebuilding what she described as her house.

This turn of phrase did not go unnoticed. The autopsy results also showed something unexpected. Although Richard died from extensive burns, the toxicology report showed that he had something that was described as a stupefying drug in his system when he passed away. A drug that would be revealed to be the same drug that Linda Brown had a prescription for, an anti-anxiety medication,

And then there was this. Investigators would learn that in the week after the fire, she called her doctor and asked for a repeat of this prescription, saying that she lost her supply in a house fire. And when it came to that house fire, the fire marshal completed a thorough investigation, but unfortunately there was no origin or cause of the fire determined. It would remain a mystery.

Obviously, the similarities between this house and Linda's previous home, both burning to the ground in mysterious circumstances, with Linda being the beneficiary of both home insurance policies, was striking. Linda was brought in for a police interview on April 22, 2011, two weeks after the house fire that caused Richard's death. During the five-hour interview, she remained calm and looked relaxed. But she did hug her bag to her chest, giving off a subtle clue that she may have been feeling defensive or trying to hide something. Linda was interviewed at the station by OPP Detective Sergeant Scott Johnson.

The interview is not available online. Only one short clip was released to the public, but reporters from Erilya Packet and Time, times described the most significant parts of it as part of their news reporting. The interview started off in a friendly conversational manner. Linda was described as chatty and giggled nervously several times. At first, she chuckled as she gave the reason why she couldn't come in earlier. It's because she had 12 kids over for her son's birthday party on the day of the fire, and she made sure to tell the investigator she had a fern.

family Easter egg hunt and dinner to get to. Quote, I'm not going to be here long, am I? The officer told her it depended on her, and then offered her sympathy, saying he couldn't imagine what she was going through. Establishing a rapport can often be key in helping a suspect to open up. She answered, I'm a strong person. But then she added she had nightmares about seeing Richard's body. Quote, I made the first.

mistake of asking the doctor if I could go in and see him. It was horrible. He was burned terribly. Just seeing him like that was very tragic. But this wasn't about Richard, clearly. Linda spoke of the tough time she'd been having the previous few years, taking care of her aging parents. Her father was of course Richard Humble's long-time friend, the one who recommended her to him as a caregiver. And in recent times, her mother had passed away after a fall down the stairs. Linda said, quote, I found her at the bottom of the stairs.

She died in my arms. When asked about her financial situation, Linda said she was financially sound because she was the beneficiary of her mother's life insurance policy. It's not known if this was true, because of course she had at least one's, sibling, John and his wife Mary, who she still owed money to. But if this was true, she would have received the wrongful dismissal payout, the insurance payout from her own home burning down,

and now her mother's life insurance payout, and the payout that she was trying to pursue from Richard's house fire. That's four separate payouts. The investigator then turned to the more serious questions. He told Linda they were looking at allegations of fraud and forgery directed towards her and believed that Richard's death was suspicious in nature. Linda replied, Well, why would I even be looked at? Linda was asked to explain how the changed will came about and here's what she said. The day before Richard's death, so April 8th, she said she arrived with hot cross buns, his favourite. They brewed some tea and sat and reworked his will.

Remember, the will she had produced after he first passed away was dated March 31st, a week before she said they sat down and reworked it. She also told police, Richard then handed her two checks totaling $65,000, which she deposited in her account. But when wills are changed, the changes need to be witnessed. The investigator asked Linda about the two witnesses to the new will. He already knew it was a forgery. He had already spoken to the two so-called witnesses, and they sheepishly told another story.

They did not witness them and said the documents were signed after Richard's death. Linda offered them $10,000 if they would back up her story, but when push came to shove, they decided to tell the truth. Here is the part of the interrogation where Linda finds out her plan backfired. But you said it had to be witnessed. So where did you guys do this? We went to two days, the 24th, the power of attorney. I took him into Zellers and we stopped at a very good friends in Arrelia. So we blew my trust and we went in and had tea and they witnessed both the power of attorney and the well.

and the will. I already know that the power of attorney and the will was signed after his death. Your witnesses have already given it up. Stop playing games. You know exactly what I'm talking about. They've already provided statements to officers. Those documents were signed after Mr. Humble's death. You know it and I know it.

Can I need you offer them $10,000 to witness the document? Who did I for $10,000? Same people that witnessed it. No, I did not. So they're lying? Yes. So they're telling us the truth about the fact that he was already dead, but they're making this part up? Well, where would they get $10,000?

You get $10,000 from the estate being settled. Come on. Oh, wow. When the estate gets settled, you're going to get a lot more than $10,000. At that point, Linda could see that that particular lie wasn't going anywhere, so she admitted to the officer that there were no witnesses. But she insisted that it didn't change anything. Richard signed the will himself before he died,

and there were no witnesses because he didn't want to do it at the lawyer's office. Quote, it's what he wanted. He considered me a daughter and he adored my son. I don't care about the will, but it's what he wanted. But the officer said he needed to be honest and tell her that the whole fire thing does not look good for her. She insisted that she had nothing to do with it. The investigator then referenced the fact that the day after Richard died, bank record showed that Linda transferred the $65,000 from her own bank account into her son's bank account, who was at that time five years old.

The officer said, quote, here is a 30-year family friend that you were taking care of, who dies tragically and horrifically in a fire, and you're at home doing online banking? Linda replied, yeah, well, I'm devastated. The investigator said he had not seen a single tear from her and suggested that the reason she has nightmares about Richard's burned body is because she knows she's going down for his murder. Linda categorically denied it. Quote, yeah, well, I'm not a murderer. I'm not capable of murder.

But the investigator wasn't having it. He told her they had some real issues. Quote, That will and that power of attorney was signed after Mr. Humble was already dead. You know it and I know it. There was a brief moment of silence while Linda contemplated her situation. Quote, I need a lawyer. It would take 14 months for police to gather the evidence they needed

to arrest and charge Linda Brown with first-degree murder. According to the Aurelia Packet and Times, they caught up with her in Ottawa, where she was preparing to leave Ontario via private plane, which she likely paid for from the money she fraudulently obtained from Richard Humble. She was also charged with fraud over $5,000 and theft under $5,000. The investigation would continue after her arrest, as investigators gathered more evidence to present at trial. The operation was massive. According to reporting by Eurelia today, the police conducted more than 170

interviews, applied for 30 search warrants and collected 22,000 pages of information related to the case. The investigation also involved a dozen other law enforcement agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice, which provided electrical and fire research insurance. engineers to re-investigate the fire scene and determine a cause. They came up empty-handed again. Two thorough investigations, yet no official cause for the fire that killed Richard Humble. This case would hinge on a lot of circumstantial evidence, but when it all came together, it painted a horrific picture.

But Linda maintained her innocence. preliminary hearings were held from April of 2013, with a goal to make sure there was enough admissible evidence to take to trial. The admissibility of two pieces of evidence were discussed at length. One was called the Chapman letters, and the other was a conversation between Linda and a casual friend. The Chapman letters referred to those two letters received by Linda's brother John and his wife Mary within two weeks of each other. Both letters appeared to have been sent from Linda's wrongful dismissal lawyer, Ronald Chapman. These were the letters that Mary was skeptical about. Now, all of Ronald Chapman's correspondence was handled by his secretary, Lisa.

She testified that while Linda received many letters from the law office during the years of her wrongful dismissal suit, the two letters received by John and Mary did not come from the office. Lisa, the person who creates all the documents and formats them, pointed out the errors with the layout of the letter. For example, the alignment was all off. It seemed to be a cut and pace job, with the first line and signature line being in different alignments to the date line and the bottom part of the letter. There were also grammatical issues and incorrect facts, like that amount of money listed, $420,000.

The secretary would testify that neither the Department of Justice nor the Privacy Commissioner were involved in the case. She also pointed out that the lawyer's office keeps all communications on file, but there was no evidence of either of those letters being drafted or sent out in any of their archives. It was believed that Linda had taken the letters she had received from her dealings with the law office previously. She'd kept the letterhead and signature lines and grafted the rest of the letter together with her own words, which explained the alignment issues. She had paid attention to some of the details necessary,

but not enough to be totally convincing as a successful forgery. The judge told the court that this evidence demonstrated, Linda had experience in forging official documents and was experienced in manufacturing realistic-looking forgeries. And since the authenticity of Richard's recently amended will was in question, the judge ruled that the evidence known as the Chapman letters was admissible at the upcoming trial. The other piece of evidence was the statement from a woman called Jennifer. Jennifer had known Linda since they were teenagers as casual friends who caught up every now and then. She alleged that in the time after Linda's own house had burned down, they had a conversation.

Jennifer said she was having some trouble selling her house, with a water main break and some resulting insurance problem she was dealing with. In response, Linda told her that she had lots of experience dealing with insurance companies and offered to be a sort of liaison between Jennifer and hers. Jennifer declined but said Linda then offered to show her how to burn down her house, so she could just collect the insurance money and be done with it. Linda added that she learned how to do it by searching the internet, but she didn't specify any particular methods that she discovered during that search.

Again, Jennifer said she wasn't interested and changed the subject. But she said that Linda went on to casually give her a basic fact. Linda said that her own house fire had been started by a plastic bag of laundry sitting in the sun, which resulted in a combustion. What Linda did not say was whether she committed the act or intended to, or whether this spontaneous combustion was one of the methods she discovered during her internet searches. Linda did not provide any further explanation about these methods or about how the insurance money could be collected as a result.

Jennifer wasn't able to recall the exact dates of these conversations, but the timeframe placed them between 2009 and 2010. Richard's house fire was 2011. In the preliminary hearing, the Crown argued that this statement was relevant. as it showed that Linda knew something about the art of arson and how to get away with it without detection. But the defense argued there was a vast difference between the offense of arson and the offense of murder. There were also several credibility issues related to Jennifer. The judge ruled that this statement given by Jennifer was inadmissible in the trial because the statement was

prejudicial and it would take very little for the jury to make the inference that Linda must have done the same thing with Richard's house fire with the intention of killing him for fraudulent financial gain. The Crown would have to push on with the trial without that evidence. Linda Brown's trial for the first-degree murder of Richard Humble started almost four years after his death in January of 2015. As you'll remember, Linda has to remember Linda had also been charged with fraud over $5,000 and theft under $5,000, and these charges were not included as part of this trial. Richard Humble had no family in Canada, but he was not forgotten by his family in the UK,

in particular his heartbroken sister Joyce, the intended beneficiary to his estate. She was devastated, but she was also in her mid-80s and was. wasn't able to travel for the trial. Luckily, Richard's nephew Kevin and his wife flew to Canada to represent Richard's family from abroad. In opening remarks to the jury, the Crown Prosecutor explained that the trial was about pieces of paper. Quote, it is the last will and testimony of Richard Humble that is at the heart of the

case. The Crown's case was this. Linda Brown was in dire financial. circumstances. She had burned through her various payouts and was broke, so she needed another way to get a lot of money really quickly. Quote, the gravy train was over, so she had to make a move, and Mr. Humble seemed like a very good target. She was pleased to get the job as caregiver to her father's old friend. She discovered that Richard owned his own home and had a substantial amount of money in the bank, and also he had no family to check up on him.

Richard was a prime target for elder abuse from someone unscrupulous. Richard was a healthy and proudly independent man and as he neared the end of his recovery and healing from his knee operation, Linda would have been aware that her time as his paid caregiver was also coming to an end. She was still in debt and would be left with no job and no source of a job. income. She still owed a lot of money to her brother and sister-in-law, John and Mary, and she saw that Richard, being an independent retiree, with no family nearby, might be the solution to her money woes. The Crown alleged that somehow she was able to gain access to his

full financial history, assets and his will, and learned that his estate included his house, his car and $400,000 in the bank. As you'll remember, Richard was very close to his sister Joyce, who still lived in the UK. In his will, he left his entire estate to her, but specified that if he lived longer than she did, he wanted the money to go toward restoring an old sailing ship in his hometown of Sunderland, England.

But Linda had other plans for that money, The evidence would show that five days before the house fire that would claim Richard's life, Linda forged a new will for him, cutting and pasting different parts from different documents. A forensic handwriting expert would testify that the will was forged and she backdated it to March 31st. The prosecution also presented the evidence of the Chapman letters, those letters supposedly from her lawyer to her brother, which proved, that Linda had experience in forgery. The forged will specified that Linda would get half the proceeds of Richard Humble's house

and all of the proceeds of his car. She also made herself executor of his will and forged documents that gave her power of attorney over him. Of course, forged documents are one thing, but she would need to have them signed and witnessed to make them legal. This was not a barrier to her. She simply forged the signatures and the date and paid two friends $10,000 to say they witnessed Richard sign the will on March 31st.

But of course, when the police questioned the two friends, they told the truth. As well as the evidence that the will was a forgery, the crown noted how out of character it would be for Richard to change his will with no warning. He was a reliable character. Quote, he was like the ships he served on, steady and straight, of course. A forensic computer analyst testified that a few days before the house fire, Linda printed out more than 40 copies of the will

that she had created on her computer. And then, on April 8, 2011, the day before the house fire, Linda deposited those two checks worth $65,000 into her bank account. The checks were from Richard's checkbook with forged signatures. According to the Barry Examiner, she also deposited a lump sum of $18,000 cash into the same account. And then she planned out how Richard would die. The Crown alleged that the night before the fire, Linda drugged Richard with an overdose of her own anti-anxiety medication, a drug that wasn't named publicly but was described as

stupefying. She likely hoped that it would look like he died in his sleep, and no one would think it worthwhile to do an autopsy on an 82-year-old man who passed away from what appeared to be natural causes. Linda thought she would get away with it. Phone records showed that later that night, Linda called Richard's house four times. He did not. not pick up. He was there all by himself and wasn't going out without assistance, so he should have picked up. The Crown alleged that the reason she didn't go and check up on him out of concern is because she was checking in to see if the drug overdose she gave him was working, and him not answering the phone, after four tries, indicated that it was. But she would need to go back in the

morning and make sure she had to go back and confirm that Richard Humble was dead. The next morning, neighbours had reported seeing Linda's car there 15 minutes before the fire broke out. The Crown's case detailed that when she saw that Richard was still alive, she deliberately set his home on fire to finish off the job. And while he was still alive when he was pulled from the house, he was barely conscious and horrifically burned, so much so that he died in hospital that night. There is an utterly horrifying inference to be made from all of this. We've all had those terrifying nightmares where something bad is happening

and you know you have to move, you have to run, but you just can't seem to move your body. You feel groggy. You are almost suspended in space. You want to move, but you just can't. This is likely what happened to Richard Humble. He would have been still under the influence of Linda's anti-anxiety drugs when he realised his house was on fire and he had to get out.

Did he see Linda come into his house? Did they have an interaction before she lit it ablaze? What must he have been thinking and feeling when he realized his fate and then realized he was powerless to do anything about it? But Linda Brown, showing her character, could only focus on a vivid description of having her own nightmares after just seeing Richard's burned body. Imagine being Richard Humble himself, living this real-life nightmare, a horrific and painful death, perhaps as much of a torture mentally as it was physically, for a clever and generous

man who deserve nothing but kindness and care. especially from the person he was paying to provide it. The Crown told the court that when Linda received the call that the person she had been caring for for weeks had passed away when his house caught on fire, she was at the grocery store buying items for her son's fifth birthday party that afternoon. And rather than rushed to the hospital out of concern, she finished her shopping, spending more than $300 for the party,

which went ahead that afternoon without issue. It was only later that evening that she said she visited the hospital. As you'll remember, a few days after the fire, Linda called her doctor to request a new prescription of her anti-anxiety medication. She told the doctor that she lost hers in a house fire. But the court heard that when she was questioned by police, she denied saying that. And after Richard had passed away, she immediately took on the task of dealing with his insurance company on his behalf.

After all, she had the document she'd forged as proof that he had handed over power of attorney. In fact, power over everything belonging to Richard Humble, so she had every right to do so. Quick as a flash, she presented a detailed three-page list of items of value in Richard's house that would need to be reprimed. placed. This would of course go to her, along with the insurance money. Richard's nephew, Kevin, would later tell the media that the family questioned whether she was planning the murder from the day she started being his caretaker. Quote, how did she know about every item in his house? So, that was the Crown's case. The defence argued that the case was circumstantial, and there was no way to prove how Richard had taken the anti-anxiety drug. Perhaps he took it himself or accidentally

mixed it up with his own medications. The fact that the cause of the fire was never determined was a key point for the defense. Quote, this case is about a man dying in a house fire and the experts were unable to conclude it was arson. Furthermore, the defense argued it would be silly for anyone to commit arson in the daytime when the chances of getting court are higher. Most people would commit arson under the cover of darkness when people are asleep. In conclusion, the defense admitted there was evidence pointing to fraud, sure, it could likely be proved that Linda did forge the will. But this was a first-degree murder trial and the defense insisted that a forged will does not prove that Linda Brown murdered Richard Humble.

As the jury deliberated, the Aurelia Packet and Times took the opportunity to speak with Richard's nephew Kevin, who had flown from Europe for the trial with his wife. He described his uncle as a clever, feisty man, an excellent engineer and a very inventive person. He spoke about how Richard loved to travel and loved to bring home those special gifts for his sister Joyce and his mother. As you'll remember, Joyce was still alive but too elderly to travel to Canada for the trial.

Kevin spoke of the impact the situation had on her. Quote, This has broken Aunt Joyce's heart. It tore her apart. He said that Richard trusted Linda to be his caretaker, and what the evidence showed she had done to him was mind boggling. As you'll remember, it was Linda's elderly father who recommended her to Richard as a potential caregiver. Her father saw his old friend needed care and Linda needed a job.

Sadly, her father too had since passed away. Richard's nephew told the Aurelia Packet in Times that, quote, Linda's father died with a broken heart knowing what his daughter had done to his friend. The jury deliberated for less than two days before returning with a verdict. They found 50-year-old Linda Brown guilty of the first-degree murder of Richard Humble. This conviction meant she would get the maximum sentence of life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. Before sentencing, Richard's sister, Joyce Humble, had sent a victim impact statement to be read out since she couldn't make it to the the trial. She wrote, quote, when I was told of my dear brother's death, I was devastated,

but when I learned how he died, I was heartbroken. He was my life, my greatest friend, my brother. In delivering the sentence, the judge told the court that Linda Brown was motivated by greed and committed a, quote, gruesome and repugnant deed when she murdered a kind old man. He then spoke directly to her. Quote, Most shocking is how you spun your web of lies, deceit and betrayal to gain his trust, then killed him for his money. You took great pains to forge his will and power of attorney, but to cash in on your plan to steal all of his money and property,

Mr. Humble needed to die, and you made sure of that. The justice pointed out the horrifying manner that Richard died. Quote, He did not die quickly. Instead, he suffered horrible burns from head to foot. This merciless and brutal crime has caused deep loss and pain to the humble family. The media reported that Richard's insurance company had asked the judge to order Linda to pay $150,000 to them as restitution, but the judge refused. He said that Linda had just been effectively given a guaranteed 25-year sentence at age 50, and she would have no way of paying it back.

He called it a hollow order. Now, it should be noted that Linda just scraped in for potential eligibility to apply for early parole under what's known as the Faint Hope Clause. The clause was decommissioned at the end of 2011, but crimes committed before then are eligible. So when Linda has served 15 years of her sentence, she'll be able to apply for early parole. She'll be 65.

It's unknown whether she will apply for it or whether she would be considered a likely candidate. After the court proceedings were over, the team responsible for the investigation into Richard's death were recognised for their hard work and dedication, with an OPP accolade award. And as you remember, there were two neighbours who risked their own lives by crawling through the Burning House

to rescue Richard. Janice Lovering and Mike Serbenek were awarded medals of bravery at ceremonies hosted at Rideau Hall in Ottawa by the Canadian Governor General. Richard Humble may have appeared to be lonely and vulnerable, an easy target even, but he had family who had family who, loved him. His nephew Kevin would tell the press that if there was one good thing to come of their

nightmare, it would be to make other elderly people aware of potential dangers. Quote, Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing. Keep your files and documents in a locked safe. It seems the world is hearing about the abuse of our elderly far too often. He's not wrong. Older adults of all walks of life are vulnerable to elderly. or action that results in harm or distress to an older person. Multiple studies report that about 10% of Canadian seniors are victims of crime each year and one in five Canadians believes they know of someone who might be experiencing it. Elder abuse takes many forms, including, of course, financial abuse,

like the misuse of a power of attorney or tricks, threats or persuasion to get money or assets. There's also physical abuse like rough handling or violence, restraints or intentionally giving incorrect doses of medication or sexual abuse. Emotional abuse comes in the form of threats or insults, acts of humiliation, isolating the older adult or treating them like a child. There's neglect, including abandonment or withholding basic human rights and the violation of rights and freedoms like interfering with spiritual practices, denying privacy or preventing visitors. And their systemic abuse which occurs in long-term care facilities. For example, using physical restraints as an easy way to prevent falls

or putting diapers on an older person to save having to help them to the washroom. Sometimes, a shortage in staff can lead to systemic abuse, as has been seen around Canada with COVID-19 outbreaks at long-term care facilities. Long-term care is in crisis right now. According to the website, It's Not Right.ca, bystanders often know or suspect the abuse is happening, but don't quite know what to do about it. And some let agist or discriminatory thinking affect their judgment, like they'll see a warning sign or they might think it.

it's understandable or just the way it's always been done, but the dignity of all people regardless of their age should be respected. Abuse is never acceptable. If you or someone you know is dealing with elder abuse, there's resources in the show notes that can give you next steps, or you can visit canada.ca slash seniors. There's also the Canadian Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse, who are on a mission to make sure older Canadians are valued, respected and live free from abuse.

Canadian True Crime's monthly donation has gone to this organization this month. To learn more about elder abuse, you can visit them at cnpea.ca or see the show notes. As well as court documents, this episode has relied on the reporting of various media outlets, including Simco.com, Aurelia Packet and Times, Aurelia Today, CTV News Barry and The Barry Examiner. To learn more and for full credits and resources, see the page for this episode at canadian truecrime.caircum.com. My podcast suggestion today is one that you likely have heard about, but one that you need to listen to if you haven't already checked it out. Court junkie. It's one of my all-time favorites and has inspired. my own storytelling many times along the way.

Host Jillian and I have quite a similar delivery, and Gillian also incorporates a lot of trial audio in court junkie episodes. And if you're a supporter on Patreon or Supercast, check your feed in the next few days because Jillian will be joining me for a discussion about today's episode. There is lots to talk about. Imagine spending 16 years in prison for a crime you didn't come. admit. Or imagine being on the jury at a trial where you have to decide whether a father murdered a

family or whether it was a cartel hit. This is Jillian from Court Junkie, a podcast that examines criminal cases and trials. Each week, I give you the facts of a new case and let you decide if you agree with the outcome. Make sure to subscribe to Court Junkie on Apple, Spotify, or any of your favorite podcast apps. Canadian True Crime is a completely independent production funded through advertising and the generosity of supporters. Thank you to everyone who listens, who rates and reviews the podcast, and who supports us. We can't thank you enough. For more information, visit canadiantruecrime.ca.cai, and while you're there, you can submit

case suggestions, follow the show and me on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, and learn more about how to get early ad-free episodes and bonus content via the exclusive feed for supporters. Thanks to the host of True for voicing the disclaimer and also to We Talk of Dreams who composed the theme song. I'll be back soon with another Canadian true crime story. See you then.