Uncover - S2 "Bomb On Board" E5: Explosive Reports

Episode Date: November 13, 2018

Medical records show one suspect had a "deep madness towards the world," while confidential documents rule out another theory. For transcripts of this series, please visit: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/uncover/uncover-season-2-bomb-on-board-transcripts-listen-1.5129876

My name is Ian Urbina. I've reported on some pretty mind-blowing stories, but nothing like what happens at sea. If they got within 800 meters, that is when we would fire warning shots. Murder, slavery, human trafficking, and staggering environmental crimes. Men have told me that they've been beaten

with stingray tails, with chains. If you really want to understand crime, start where the law of the land ends, the outlaw Ocean. Available now on CBC Listen and everywhere you get your podcasts. This is a CBC Podcast. Previously on Bomb On Board. Okay, so I think I mentioned to you guys I was trying to find Leah Edgar, the daughter of Douglas.

So right before I went to bed last night, I got an email. She writes, which is kind of how she starts it. It's interesting in itself. I'm the proud daughter of Douglas Garfield Edgar. Did you ever have any question in your mind that for some crazy reason Peter might have been responsible? Well, we knew it wasn't him that did it. And the RCMP told us that it definitely wasn't him that did it. Three, two, one.

What does this tell you about who might have made this bomb? It wouldn't take a lot of expertise to do what we did today. So where's the alarm clock? That we haven't found yet. I'm Ian Hanemansook. And I'm Johanna Wagstaff. From CBC's Uncovered. This is Bomb On Board.

Investigating one of the largest unsolved mass murders on Canadian soil. The crash of CP Flight 21. Chapter 5. Within days of getting back from the quarry, we have some new answers. First, from the RCMP, who have finally confirmed the official status of this case. This is a concluded investigation. Closed, concluded. Concluded. Closed.

Despite RCMP never determining exactly who did it, the file was shut and it ended up deep in the archives. We are here to pick up some documents from Toronto. These are the ones. Another new batch of documents from our Access to Information and Privacy Requests, known as ATIPS, have arrived. Thank you very much. Okay, so we have a series of discs. This time, we get the final explosives report to the RCMP from one of the biggest military research facilities in the country. The report is dated March 1967. It's 36 pages long. And on the top corner of every page is typewritten confidential.

Wow, it's like a science report. Abstract. It goes in-depth about the chemical analysis from the crash site. Parts highlighted here or not? It would have been nice to have had this before we went to the quarry, but it's still worth the wait. And there is something new here. Crash of the DC-6B aircraft in BC was caused by high explosive charge.

The study reported here. The report confirms a number of things. High velocity explosives did cause the blast, but exactly what kind of explosive, they couldn't be sure. They haven't concluded that it was all dynamite. They just say it was three to four pounds of high explosive. They did, however, rule out black gunpowder.

Even though it was detected at the crash site, they say it was likely on the fuse that set off the explosion. And one more finding from the 1967 report. And one more finding from the 1967 report. The lab tested every recovered fragment of that lavatory to determine the blast pattern. Their conclusion? The only place the bomb could have been planted was on the open floor between the sink and the toilet. In the open area between the sink stand and the toilet, it was on the floor.

In an investigation where there have been so many questions, it's nice to have a definitive conclusion like this. For Mike Arnfield, our cold case investigator, the placement of the bomb has been on his mind from the very beginning. A lavatory is actually not an advantageous place to bring down a plane in that it is away from the engines, it's away from the wings, unless someone's on board already. down the plane, in that it is away from the engines, it's away from the wings, unless someone's on board already. If somebody wanted to hide a bomb on the plane with a timing device, putting it on the floor

is probably not the best spot. Yeah, put it under a seat. After this report came in, we did manage to reach a family member of the pilot our producer Alina had tracked down. The pilot who died a little more than a year after the crash. His son had never heard the theory of the disgruntled pilot. He said his family found it ludicrous. He said he didn't lose his father to suicide, but to an accident when his father's car was hit by the trailer of a logging truck. Even though we were unable to find that timer at the quarry,

based on all the evidence we now have, we can rule out the theories of a disgruntled pilot and the moon-faced man a cleaner said she saw. This means whoever planted the bomb was most likely on the plane. After all of this, the rumor of a fifth man was just that. A rumor. So we got back in touch with Catherine Steele. She had given us the most detailed account of this fifth suspect.

Hello? Hi, Cathy. Yeah. Her uncle was Captain Jack Steele. And for the last 20 years, many members of her family have believed that the person who committed the bombing wasn't a passenger, that it was someone who got away. I'm glad that we are at least not falsely accusing somebody. Let's not pursue it any further because it would appear that it was an unfortunate situation that this man died. It's funny, we always want to hang something on it to get an answer.

So we're back to the passengers on the plane and the RCMP's original four suspects. At this point, we have thousands of RCMP documents. And going back through them, turns out there's a small note in the documents. A memo. It's dated October 1965, and one sentence in particular jumps out. There is no indication that he was involved in the placing of an explosive on the aircraft. It's a reference to Stephen Kolizar, the man with a criminal record and an expertise in using explosives. While later documents still appear to list Kolizar as a suspect, this is the closest we've come to seeing a document

that potentially exonerates one of the suspects. Exactly why isn't mentioned in any of the files we have, but Mike Arnfield says it does make sense. He's got a history of hot-blooded violence, you could say reactive violence. The 54-year-old had several violent crimes in his past, including one that would now be a sexual assault, and a murder charge, which was downgraded to manslaughter and eventually an acquittal. We can exclude him in large part because his history of violence is exculpatory given what we see in the bombing. His daughter, Sandra Kolizar, initially agreed to an interview, but then she sent me a two-line email at 5.28 a.m. on the

morning we were supposed to do the interview. Hi, Ian, she wrote. I'm sorry, but then she sent me a two-line email at 5.28 a.m. on the morning we were supposed to do the interview. Hi, Ian, she wrote. I'm sorry, but I've changed my mind about an interview. I feel very emotional when thinking about it. After a few months, I sent her one last email, and she replied right away. She was ready to speak. The reporters came to our house and interviewed our mother and all of us kids were on the front, I think the front of the sun. They had all of our pictures on the front page. My mother, myself and my siblings. I never seen my mother's face look so horrified. And my brother, you could tell that he knew what happened, but the rest of us didn't. Us girls did not know what happened.

Because we were smiling. I don't think our mom told us. Sandra says she didn't learn about her father's past or even that he was a suspect until years after the crash. She and her sister were at the library and they were trying to find out more about what had happened. We opened up the paper. They said our father was a suspect. They said he had a fight with somebody in 1958, and he killed somebody.

It was really shocking to see that, because we did not know anything about that. They struggled to process that news, and they were still processing it when they went to Hundred Mile House for the 30th anniversary of the crash. We stayed away from all the families. And then we ended up going to a church. I talked to one lady and told her how we felt. And they said, don't feel like that, and they made us feel welcome.

They said, no, we don't think that, we don't think that at all. Ken Leland remembers seeing Sandra at the 30th anniversary. He was there with his dad, Cy. And there were two girls there that kept totally to themselves. And while we were there, I went over and introduced myself, and they provided the information that their dad was one of the suspects. Our name tags, Colazar. We were worried that people would hate us.

You could tell it was very difficult for them being there. I asked Dad, just the two of us, I said, would you be willing to talk to these two girls and tell them what you think? And that is when he told us. Our father was cleared of that a long time ago, but nobody had ever told us. And you could just see the two of them, it was like floodgates opened. With the realization that in all likelihood their dad was not the one responsible for this. It was a big relief, a big sigh of relief, you know, walking around thinking

our father was a suspect. It was horrible. We wondered if our mother passed away not knowing, we didn't know if she knew or not. You know, 30 years of pent-up anxiety, I guess, just let loose. It was probably one of the most powerful days I think I've ever had. It made us feel as if we didn't have to hide from the rest of the families that day. And we didn't feel so afraid

to approach them and talk with them. Watching those two girls. And I guess watching Dad at the same time, because he, like I say, he very seldom showed emotion, but he did that thing. I remember when I was smaller, I would look around. I wonder if my dad is alive and look for him in a crowd. People can't imagine it.

You know, it was such a big tragedy that happened in Canada, and it was swept under the carpet. Nobody spoke of it. And it was a big story. It's a big story. Given the contradictory documents, Stephen Colazar will have to remain on our list of suspects, for now. But we have crossed off the disgruntled pilot and moon-faced man theory from our list. And so it's starting to feel like we're able to narrow that list down to three main suspects. Peter Broughton, the gunpowder guy.

Paul Vandermuelen, the American prospector. And Douglas Edgar, the guy who bought the insurance. One of these men would have had to carry the bomb onto the plane. Whether the bomb was made of gunpowder or dynamite, these ingredients would have been pretty easy to access in 1965. And they didn't have to worry about airport security, because there wasn't any. Flying back in the 60s was a whole different experience. Just about everybody travels by air these days. A new sound disturbs the Arctic stillness. The roar of the airplane's motors has come to stay. Crisscrossing routes are weaving a bright new tapestry of service to the present and promise to the future.

Flying across the coastal slopes, the graceful ship casts its shadow on mile after mile of timbered hills and green and fertile farmland. Then soaring high above snowy white clouds in a peaceful sky makes her approach to Vancouver's busy Sea Island Airport. Out of Vancouver, on Monday morning, we got the hungover loggers coming on board the airplane, and they all had their bottle. And when the hunters came on in September, we had their rifles right there behind the webbing. The guns all sitting there, nobody thought anything of it.

We were trained to be hostesses. Our blouses were sharkskin. Flight tenant couldn't weigh more than 135 pounds and couldn't be married. Smoking was definitely allowed. And the gangway was solid smoke. That's how bad it was. The food was quite different. It was all still served on China, and you got glass glasses,

and you got silverware that was heavy, not this plastic stuff and whatever. My name is June Austin. I was a cabinet attendant, or as we called ourselves, stewardess, from 1963 to 1970. Joan Vanstone, I only lasted 18 months because at 30 you had to quit, because I guess we were too old.

My name's Ralph Quick. Joseph Lavoie. My name's Janet Sinclair. My name is Larry Vance. I joined the Canadian Aviation Safety Board in 1984 to become an aircraft accident investigator. People could get aboard the airplane and say they were somebody else. Nobody asked you for a passport or identification or anything.

You just say, here's your ticket, and away you go. It was not a question of security. I mean, in the early days, there was no security at all. There was no need for that. It was kind of nice. Please extinguish your cigarettes. The captain advises the weather is overcast. He also reminds you that the safest portion of your journey is now over.

There have been nine cases of sabotage in North America, the motive usually to collect the insurance. Oh, absolutely. They used to have the little kiosk. And I think it evolved eventually into where you walk up to a little machine like an ATM and buy your insurance from an ATM. I remember back when people used to sell it to you.

With their harness over their shoulder, you sell cigarettes and life insurance. And it turned out to be not a great idea because people could go in at the last minute and buy life insurance. And with the idea that they weren't going to make it and somebody was going to benefit from their demise, I don't think they sell life insurance like that anymore. I can remember wearing a little frilly dress and jumping around on some of the chairs at the airport and getting yelled at for jumping on the chairs. It was Leah Edgar's first time at the airport.

She was there to see her father off. In those days, you just walked onto the plane and you carried your luggage on and there was no searching, no looking at your bags. All you had to have was a ticket. She says he told her he was headed north for work and didn't know when he'd be back. I remember sitting around the breakfast table

and talking to us and telling us that, you know, now that I was going to be the oldest and I had to look after my grandmother and mother while he was gone, and that was my responsibility. We tracked down Leah in Southern California, where she's been living for decades, and we flew her to Toronto to meet with us. It's the first time we've been able to sit down face-to-face with one of the family members

of a suspect. Is this my good side? It is. You're such a liar. You don't have a good side. Oh, just poked myself with the microphone. All right. Tell me about the time.

When my mother was never one to hang on to me. We're sitting by the CBC atrium, along with our camera crew. Leah's wearing a thin, bright red tie. It belonged to her dad. She is adamant that her father is innocent. My name is Leah Edgar. My father was Douglas Garfield Edgar, and he was killed in the July 8, 1965 Canadian Pacific Flight 21 crash. Douglas Edgar, the insurance guy, one of the RCMP's main suspects.

He made his living logging, fishing, and gambling. He was a gambler, and he always bought a lottery ticket. He always, every year, bought a ticket for the Irish sweepstakes. Never won. An RCMP report said Edgar had no bank account and left only $30 behind. In the same paragraph, it says a credit check found him living, quote, well within his means. Police noted that Edgar had packed light, and while he told his wife he was headed to Prince George for work, the RCMP couldn't find any evidence that anyone had hired him.

So what do you make of that? He worked for many years on log booms and at different sawmills, and unfortunately, and it had different sawmills. And unfortunately, you don't make as much money at that. So he played poker. When we say gambling, that was really about the only thing he really did. Those days it was illegal, but they had private clubs that you became a member of.

And at one time he even operated one. Back in 1965, gambling of any kind was illegal, not just private poker clubs. There were certainly no casinos here in Canada, no lotteries. Even that Irish sweepstakes competition Leah mentioned before? Illegal. So he may not have wanted to have disclosed all the details of where he was going to be ending up in Prince George. Right before the plane took off, he spent $5.50 to take out four insurance policies. The beneficiaries were his wife, mother, daughter and niece. Combined, the payout would be $125,000. In today's money, it's like spending $45 just before you get on the plane for an insurance policy

that would pay out almost a million dollars. You know, of course, that that transaction is what put your dad... In the spotlight. In the spotlight. And in a very negative spotlight. Now, it might sound strange today, but buying life insurance policies at the airport was pretty common right through the 70s. Actually, that's how my parents met,

was selling insurance at the foreign bureau counter at Vancouver Airport, where my mom was my dad's boss. A nice bit of Wagstaff family history. The insurance clerk at the Vancouver Airport at the time told police that she didn't see anything that was suspicious. In fact, she recalled selling the insurance to Edgar and a tender interaction between father and daughter, telling police that he impressed her as being, quote,

very considerate. And I can even remember him giving me some of the change and putting it into the machine. And then he had me do it because a prize came out. Leah told us this wasn't the first time Edgar had bought life insurance. He'd even given his brother a policy as a wedding gift. My dad was 6'2", very tall, slim, athletic build, good looking man. I was very lucky. My mother and father loved each other very much. My father was

a man who was very outgoing. Leah also describes her dad as a self-made man and self-educated. This is my father's favorite poet. She's brought a small book of poetry with her, a Christmas present. And I know that when he gave this to me in December of 1964, he said to my darling daughter, may you someday find in these pages a few moments of tranquility, dad. Leah tells us her parents had saved up and bought a plot of land in Surrey, just outside Vancouver. They were hoping to build their dream home. They were renting a house nearby and had started to clear the land. My parents had plans for the future. And that's not a man who is going to go out and kill himself or 51 other people.

Police tried to find out if Edgar had any gambling debts. One tip said that he'd lost a high-stakes poker game a few years before and was under pressure to pay it back. A later report says police were unable to prove definitively if this was the case. They did a background check on every single one of the 52 people that were killed in the crash. Within days of the crash, the police showed up. Leah was nine years old. They searched our house. They were particularly focused on the crash. Within days of the crash, the police showed up. Leah was nine years old. They searched

our house. They were particularly focused on the garage and they dug up locations in the backyard and did tests, I assume, to see if there was anything buried out there. Nothing was ever found and nothing was ever found to have any types of gunpowder or residue or dynamite or any dynamite at our home or on any of his possessions. Then came the reporters. My mother invited them in and she talked to them. He wanted to see some pictures of my father and my mother. She brought them. He asked for a glass of water.

She got up and went into the kitchen. And when she came back, they continued talking, and then he left. And he had taken the family photos. They were published without our permission. And we never received the photos back. I can remember newspaper reporters sitting outside in cars, waiting for us to come in and out of the house. We had to have our blinds and curtains closed for several weeks.

Because her father was a suspect, Leah says it took years for the insurance company to pay out the claim. We went through hell. We became homeless. We were struggling financially I've been hesitant to really even tell people who I was when I went to 100 mile house because he was a suspect there were people that said and those people who got all that insurance money, they were the ones that did it. And, you know, we need to look at those people.

And I'm going, lady, you have no idea. You have no idea what people went through. Did you think that or did you say that to her? No, I just thought it. Always be polite. Always be polite. And you know what? At this point, they have carried that anger for all these decades. I'm not going to be able to convince them. They want someone to blame.

In 2017, it felt like drugs were everywhere in the news. So I started a podcast called On Drugs. We covered a lot of ground over two seasons, but there are still so many more stories to tell. I'm Jeff Turner, and I'm back with season three of On Drugs. And this time, it's going to get personal. I don't know who Sober Jeff is. I don't even know if I like that guy.

On Drugs is available now wherever you get your podcasts. One thing we did discover after our conversation with Leah is that in the early 60s, there had been at least three cases of people bringing down planes where insurance money seemed to be a motive. It's something Ian and I have been going back and forth on a lot. So I still have to study this some more, but we've got, so Continental Airlines Flight 11 certainly seems to fit a pattern of somebody who has financial problems, buys an insurance policy, and then kills everybody on board, including themselves, right? The most infamous of these cases was Continental Airlines Flight 11. It crashed in Iowa in 1962, so just three years earlier,

killing all 45 people on board. This concept of, well, was this some kind of a copycat? Not necessarily like a notoriety copycat, but did somebody else get the idea for life insurance solving problems through these other cases that had happened, although I haven't seen these ones? The FBI found that the person responsible had bought the maximum amount of life insurance at the airport just before boarding the plane, and then put six sticks of dynamite in the towel bin of the rear lavatory. Now all of a sudden we have something that tips towards a motive for Edgar.

Not that it changes the weight. I mean, you're right, there isn't anything now that can limit it. In the previous cases, these were all men in financial trouble who wanted to provide for their families and presumably hide their suicides in larger murders. Leah Edgar stands by her conviction that her dad is innocent. That's why she's come here, is to defend her father's reputation.

And she believes the police didn't do a proper investigation, that the evidence that would have exonerated her father was missed or contaminated. The scene had not been secured. Law enforcement had not shown up until hours after. People who were there to try and help survivors had climbed all over and contaminated the site. This makes you angry. You bet.

Five decades later, there's no way to know what was missed, if anything, by police that first night at the crash site. to know what was missed, if anything, by police that first night at the crash site. We're ready to meet with Mike Arnfield, our cold case investigator, to see what he's found and to see how it's going with the new algorithm he's using, Behavioral Sequence Analysis, BSA. Basically, BSA takes everything we know about the behavior of a suspect and compares it to similar cases to see if there are any patterns. Although Mike's partner, Dave Keatley, does have some caveats. I mean, your case was extremely difficult and that's why when I spoke to other people involved with this,

I've been very cautious about the results. I think a supplementary tool is probably the best way to explain it. The case will go through the suspects. We've come out to Western University in London, Ontario, where Mike teaches to get his thoughts on the case of CP21. So thank you very much for doing this. No problem. Nice to finally meet you.

Mike is using his knowledge as a former police officer, along with the BSA, to see who he can strike from the list of suspects. First of all, this is probably one of the more remarkable cold cases in Canadian history. What struck me right away, having looked at a number of historical documents, including original police reports, is I would actually suggest for 1965, the quality of this reporting is, and investigation, is outstanding. Excluding a deceased person is very difficult. Absent writings or anything that's left behind, either to absolutely elevate them to the status of suspect, for instance, a suicide letter or a manifesto

being left behind. All we have to rely on is anecdotal information from that period about the lives that they led and who their associates were and sort of what they had done in the past. Yeah, it's interesting. Obviously, there's no social media. If they have no diary, if they left no letter, if they were not trying to leave clues, then what do you do? It's an open question at that point. I think they rightfully, led them to rightfully screen in three or four people as mutual persons of interest. It takes me back to the Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train scenario, in that if just one of these persons of interest was on board with the fact that we have four highly suspicious people

engaging in highly suspicious people engaging in highly suspicious behavior lying about where they're going or what they're planning on doing next it just muddies the waters extraordinary that there would be these four people on a relatively small plane it's uncanny let's start with uh with peter brown so peter broughton is very compelling Let's start with Peter Broughton. So Peter Broughton is very compelling. Here's a guy who's described by his physician at the time as unstable, possibly suicidal. There's a name redacted in the report that's a civilian.

We've been looking at the same documents, but it now appears we have some different interpretations of what they say. So on Broughton, because I don't remember reading this, on Broughton they do have like a doctor's report about him being suicidal? It's in the first. What we're searching for is an RCMP interview with Broughton's doctor at the mine. While we have you here, I just want to make sure I find this. So that's the meeting of the investigators, it wasn't in that one. So this is the... The doctor was asked if he thought Broughton would have committed this type of crime,

and according to the RCMP notes, the doctor said no, but that, quote, a youth such as Broughton, who kept to himself and kept everything to himself, would likely commit suicide in this manner to get attention. The same file states that the doctor described Broughton as, and this is another quote, a very intelligent boy, but a bit odd in keeping to himself. He was never known to talk about a woman or have anything to do with that. This is part of what's led Mike to believe Broughton was possibly suicidal and potentially unstable. Because that's what we're going over now, is what the cost of the time, what made them put him on the suspect list.

It makes us wonder whether we should rerun the BSA. No single thing. I think it's like death by a thousand cuts. Like there's just too many things. The same as when we run the BSA. He ticks every box. In terms of what other cases ours is being compared to in the BSA, Mike tells us he's input examples of mass murders, mass murders that end in suicide, and aviation disasters, including the three insurance-related attacks we told you about earlier. There are comparatively few mass murders committed by explosives.

So is it perfect? No. Can we extrapolate a little bit and sort of pad the database with similar, not necessarily identical occurrences, yes. Of course, the BSA technology is only as effective as the data that's being fed into it. Understanding. We're trying to predict or model the behaviors. Say one of the data points that you want to sort of enter into this analysis is an RCMP statement from a loved one. So we asked Dave, how do you turn notes in a case file into the data for this kind of analysis? Do you turn that into a mathematical statement?

The first thing we do is read the information about that suspect and begin to break down the statement into sequential behaviors. So let's say one of our suspects suffered depression. We might label that category D for depression. Let's say another suspect had financial difficulties. We might label financial difficulties as FD. If three different suspects all suffered depression, I mean, are you able to weight those different data points? Yes, we certainly can. What kind of depression do we mean? Do we mean the depression that's likely to lead to harm or suicide ideation or actual

suicide attempts or depression that could relate to more, you know, planting a bomb on a plane? And that's one of the things I'm always really wary of. A lot of that information is missing, especially when it comes to psychological states and intentions and ideas. One aspect of this case that makes it so challenging is that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence. So much of what we're reading is left open to some kind of interpretation.

And it's tempting to try and fill in those gaps, but we have to stick with what we know for certain. Do you find that sometimes these take a few times to run and sort of you have to fine-tune the inputted data? Absolutely. We get Dave and Mike to rerun the BSA a couple more times for some of the suspects to double-check how we're interpreting all the facts. And then we head back to see Mike.

Alright, so let's start from... We jump right in by getting him to run through the prime suspects. First, Douglas Edgar, Leah's dad, the man with the insurance. Several passengers carried life insurance. In many cases, bought not necessarily right before the flight, but relatively soon before the flight, but relatively soon before the flight. These machines and kiosks were in airports to appeal to impulse purchasing of life insurance. This guy's a gambler. He's impulsive by nature. And being impulsive is

why Mike doesn't think Edgar did it. He says a plan like this would have been premeditated. But in at least two of the other airport insurance bombings in the early 60s, the bomber did buy life insurance at the airport. Mike says these other cases are outliers. He argues that buying life insurance and killing yourself to provide money to a loved one could be a factor in a crime like this, usually the motive requires a lot of anger too. Anger, he says, trumps altruism. Mike points out a few other things. So here's someone who makes a living by deceiving other people through card games. It would have been intuitive for him to take out a conventional policy weeks or months earlier.

He also says to look at the profile of Edgar. When you look at the fact he had no access to the explosives, no history of violence, whether it's the Unabomber or the Columbine attackers, there was always a dress rehearsal. So where and how was that carried out by Edgar? And he had no access or experience with explosives. Where did he get the stuff? Next, Paul Vandermuelen, the American prospector. This guy's an American expat, purchased a large amount of life insurance before the flight.

We know boarded the flight carrying a loaded gun. He was on his way ultimately to scout potential mining locations. We're not entirely sure, but he had two business partners that were flying on a loaded gun. He was on his way ultimately to scout potential mining locations. We're not entirely sure but he had two business partners that were flying on a different flight. For whatever reason he decided not to go with them. He was carrying a large amount of money and this gun which given where he was going to the frontier I guess made sense. He was under the care of a psychiatrist. We're not sure why. I think he enters the orbit of the original task force and stays there because he's just mysterious. Where was he going? Why is he not flying with his business partners?

Why is he carrying such a large amount of cash? If you're going to go and demolish an aircraft and kill yourself, why are you carrying money? Okay, so Mike's not sold on Edgar or Vandermuelen. It's our last remaining suspect who's caught his attention. The gunpowder guy. Peter Broughton.

Let's look at the behavior, overall behavior of this guy. Described as a loner. He's into firearms. He is an armorer at, actually, the Cassier Mine Gun Club. So he has access to gunpowder. He has access to dynamite. He has a facility where he can test explosives without raising suspicion. where he can test explosives without raising suspicion. So he's back in Vancouver.

They find this gunpowder in his room after the fact. He takes out shortly before the massacre a number of books on aircraft. And then there's the detail of something Broughton's mother may have said. We do know that there is this discrepancy that I cannot get over involving Broughton's mother in terms of this statement that she then retracts about something being in his room. After the crash, Broughton's mother was interviewed by two investigators. According to them, she said her son had warned her that his reloading equipment was, quote, she said her son had warned her that his reloading equipment was, quote, safe, except for one type of material that was quite dangerous,

and that he would get rid of it before he left. Later, speaking to the RCMP, Broughton's mother denied that he ever told her there was something dangerous in the room. He is the prime suspect, even without the BSA, just based on what we know about how these guys operate. But why would he do this? Why would he get on that plane, be seen off by, I think his mother, but certainly his sister and his nephew and his niece and his brother-in-law, a young man who was hoping to go to UBC, and the sister who I talked to, I mean, 53 years later,

feels like she has no memory of anything that was a miss. Why would he do this? That's the question everyone asks about every mass murderer. Even if they live, we sometimes never know. In terms of people who might be watching this, might be listening to the podcast, who 53 years later as people are in their 60s, 70s, 80s who have a connection to this, somebody may have some insight into who did this.

Someone may be holding, yeah, the key to all this. And we don't know what that is. It's a suicide note of some kind. Whatever that item is, if it still exists, I think it's the missing link here. There were many theories about what happened to CPA 21. The man charged with sifting through that speculation and the rubble was Cy Leland,

Chief Transport Canada Investigator, now retired. We did determine that the cause of the accident was an explosive device in the bathroom that severed the tail section from the airplane in flight. But who and why? Police investigators had a short list of suspects, but because the suspects were on the plane itself, proving who did it is another matter altogether. We've come across this 1995 documentary from City TV in Vancouver

about the 30th anniversary of CP Flight 21. It was lent to us by one of the victim's families. There's a man named Paul David Vandermuller. Unfortunately, we have no picture. Paul Vandermuller. Unfortunately, we have no picture. Paul Vandermuller wasn't publicly named as a suspect in the press back in the 60s. We first came across his name in police reports. He had also reported to a psychiatrist on a few occasions. In the documents we've seen so far, there have been hints about a psychiatric report involving Vandermuller. There's a letter from a Seattle doctor that's paraphrased in police memos. It mentions van der Muelen has a, quote, deep madness towards the

world and was capable of violent, irrational acts. We've been focusing so much on Peter Broughton, on Leah's dad, Douglas Edgar. Have we overlooked a key suspect? All right, let's move ahead here. In every document we've received so far, the actual doctor's report has been redacted. But weeks after we speak with Mike, we get another batch of ATIPs. And yes, we know it's taking a long time for them to come in. Interesting.

There's one medical file. And for once, nothing is redacted. The date is April 12th, 1965, and it looks to be a letter to Vandermuelen's insurer from a hospital in Seattle. Statement of patient's treatment. So he was admitted August 19th, 1963 to September 10th, 1963. August 19th, 1963 to September 10th, 1963. Diagnosis, traumatic neurosis, unimproved, unable indefinitely to resume usual occupation.

So this report shows that Vandermuelen was seeing a psychiatrist the year before the crash. And traumatic neurosis, it's what we now call post-traumatic stress disorder. Remarks, patient was followed in this outpatient clinic from January 14, 1964 to November 4, 1964, followed by the psychiatric service. No abnormalities in orientation or intellectual function were found. He was considered to have chronic anxiety reaction, not fit for duty indefinitely regarding

psychophysiological musculoskeletal system reaction. But I mean, I have no idea what chronic anxiety reaction is. But it is interesting that he was basically under psychiatric care for a year before the crash. Or at least seeing somebody. We decided to run this past a psychologist to see how much weight we should give to it. Hi there, I'm Dr. Michael Woodworth. I'm a registered psychologist that focuses mostly on forensic psychology, so psych and law issues.

And I'm also a professor at the University of British Columbia. His focus is on the psychology of criminals. Here it is. So that is suspect number, that's Vander Mullen. Vander Mullen is the best suspect for a more of a pathology perspective. The fact that this new medical record is dated so closely to the time of the crash is a big clue for Woodworth. The thing that would jump out is that page three near the top, November 22nd RCMP memo,

where the individual psychiatrist referred to him as a highly intelligent person but very evasive, and that a person who shows a deep madness towards the world also showed him to be capable of violent, irrational acts. If it gets into grudge territory or gets into a sort of contempt for humans in general, then we're talking. Then that sentence jumps out. That glowed the strongest for me. We've been able to confirm that Vanermuhlen

had a boating accident in 1963. He suffered a concussion and was later treated for anxiety. Well, if he completely recovered, then when's that psychiatrist note from about him having a deep madness to the world? We don't have the actual date of that note, but everything we do have suggests that the psychiatrist's observations were made before the crash, not during a police interview afterwards. And if this is the case, Woodworth says this makes it way more significant. For me, it would be huge, you know, if this is not from something of a psychiatrist being interviewed after the fact. You can have a lot of confidence that that is something

that actually was relayed in a confidential environment without it thinking that it would ever need to be released. But another big clue for Woodworth is that Vandermueling was carrying a gun on the plane. And it wasn't a hunting rifle. It was a.44 Magnum revolver. Now, we haven't been able to verify that he was carrying the gun with him on the flight. The closest we've come is a note in one of the original RCMP reports saying that he was carrying $800 and a revolver. And that his gun was recovered at the scene of the crash.

So maybe it was in his luggage, but based on her documents, it seems likely he had it on him. Woodward says whoever set off the bomb would have wanted to make sure it went off. At all costs. Oh, those combination of things, I can't believe... Like, he had a gun on him, he had some contempt for the world, and he took out a couple months where...

He's talking about Vander Muelen's life insurance policy. Buying it a couple months in advance is safer in terms of it seeming a bit off than at the airport right then. And then on top of that, you throw in this idea where, especially because it would be the type of pathology that would map on with not necessarily wanting the infamy and notoriety. There was no suicide note found or any claim of responsibility. Because if you don't really care about other humans and in fact you have contempt for them, then you're not really caring about having them be impressed with you or not. You just want to, you know, make them suffer and hurt them. And so it fits that bill too.

make them suffer and hurt them. And so it fits that bill too. Vander Mullen has a complicated family tree, and most of his relatives have died. We did find a great-granddaughter from his first marriage, Sarah Taylor. She didn't grow up with the Vander Mullens, but she told us a story her grandmother had told her. And we were going over some of the family history. She brought up that her

father had died in a plane crash and that her mother told her that she suspected he's the one who caused it. But she didn't agree with that and she didn't know why her mom would say something like that and that it upset her that her mom said that. The police records don't have any interviews with Vander Mullen's first wife. Even if it was a bad divorce, this seems like a big claim. The other person we were able to track down is a stepdaughter from Vander Mullen's second marriage. After he remarried, he moved to BC with his new wife and her two daughters, Renee and Jerry, a little more than a month before the crash. New marriage, new home, new job, not a bad time to get life insurance. Renee Rowe now lives in California.

Two of his friends owned a small plane, and I think it only seated two. And four of them, I think four of them wanted to go. And so they drew straws, go figure. And he lost. And so he had to take a commercial flight. Renee was just eight at the time. Her sister, Jerry, was 11. So Jerry said that she remembers, you know, Mom just crying a lot.

And we stood, I guess, apparently, because at that time you could stand right at the gate, so wherever, right there, and watch them get on the plane. And she said Jerry remembers just seeing the other children. You know, kids look at kids. So she remembers seeing children getting on the plane. When we first reached Renee, she had no idea that Vanermulen was even a suspect. What she does know is that his death

had a huge impact on her mother. And then she just went into a tailspin, frankly. And it was the rest of her life. It was horrible. I was young, and it was a short period of time, and I didn't know him that well, other than he was very good to my mom. So what do we know about Paul Vandermuelen?

Well, Flight 21 didn't have a signed seating. But based on the location and condition of his body, we do know Vandermuelen was likely near the rear of the plane and that traces of copper were found embedded in his body. So copper is used in blasting caps and could have been part of the bomb. It certainly wasn't part of the plane. But copper being in his body, maybe that just means that he was sitting at the back of the plane when the bomb went off. But interesting that only van der Muelen's body had those copper fragments in it, even though Edgar's body was also recovered from the tail where the bomb was detonated.

Kolizar and Broughton, by the way, our other two suspects, were found at the front of the plane. And our psychologist Michael Woodworth says this is worth noting. The chances that someone else is waiting right outside the door to go to the bathroom are at least 50-50. I mean, almost for sure the person who would set that bomb off would want to do everything in their power to make sure it effectively goes off. So I can't see what the motivation would be to leave it in the bathroom unattended. So, yeah, they'd be standing right there, presumably. We have thousands of pages of documents.

Some are still redacted. There could be files out there that haven't been revealed to us. There are a lot of unknowns. that haven't been revealed to us. There are a lot of unknowns. One thing, though, that's been clear to us from the start is how painful this has been for the relatives, even more than half a century later. And we absolutely do not want to wrongfully accuse anyone

and cause them even more pain. It's so important at this point in our investigation for us to carefully go back over everything we've gathered, all of our interviews and all of those files, and try and make sense of it, to try and get some answers for these families. And then there's a piece of unfinished business with Dee Dee Henderson. Coming up on the last chapter of Bomb on Board.

This belonged to your Uncle Joe. It belongs to you and your family. So I'm really happy to give it back to you. Thank you very much. Well, I got to say, I'm frustrated that no one ever explored that. Like, what does deep madness toward the world mean? I don't buy that someone who has that as their sole motive, that he would go to the airport with his nine-year-old daughter,

get on the plane knowing an hour later he's going to kill everybody. Yeah, I just don't buy it at all. You'd have to be homicidal to think that the best way to kill yourself was to kill an entire plane. So either the culprit here was incredibly able in making sure that there was not a shred of direct evidence tying them to the crime, or their families were complicit in keeping that secret. And they've kept it a secret all this time, and maybe they always will. You'd have to make a leap with anyone in order to figure out who did this. Uncover, Bomb on Board is hosted by me, Ian Hannah-Mansing, and Johanna Wagstaff.

It's produced by Mika Anderson and Polly Legere, and written by Mika, Polly, Johanna, and me. Our associate producer is Alina Ghosh. Tiffany Foxcroft is our producer with The National. Mixing and sound design by Mika Anderson, Polly Legere, and Mitchell Stewart. Additional sound design on this episode by Tom Howell. Sarah Clayton is our digital producer. Our senior producer is Tanya Springer.

And our executive producer is Aurif Noorani. Subscribe to the series wherever you get your podcasts. We're at cbc.ca slash uncover. Hi, it's Captain Molstad calling. My father was a CP pilot, and he was the pilot that brought that aircraft into Vancouver and gave it to his friend, and then it blew up. Hello, my name's Bill Roxborough, and I'm the son of William S. Roxborough,

who was one of the investigators of the CP crash. Yes, my name is Barry Stevenson. We have an involvement with respect to the crash. My married name is Margaret Hammond. My full name was Margaret Ann Isabella King, proud daughter of Clement Livingston King. If nothing else has come out of this, at least it lets me know that people, it's not forgotten because my mother never spoke about it again. She never put a picture up.

It was over. I went back to school. That's it. We never talked about it again. It was just too horrible. So at least I know that somebody is remembering. And I think if nothing else comes for that, there's my father coming back to give me my little Christmas chime gift.