Webpage visitor notifications
The Murder of Lindsay Buziak

March 3/2023 Lindsay Buziak Murder – Psychology of Cults, Cognitive Dissonance & Intuition

This week, somebody who goes by the name ‘Anonymous’ has tried to link me with a group with whom I actually have no affiliation.

Apparently this is a group who are supporters of Shirley Zailo and they include Lindsay Buziak’s mother, Evelyn, whistle blower, Sandra and retired RCMP ‘homicide detective and coroner turned crime writer’, Garry Rodgers. Try as I might, I can’t fathom how I was lumped in with this ‘group’ when anybody who has read my blog knows I am on the other side of the fence with both feet on the ground. In fact, I believe my thoughts are more closely aligned with another poster also named ‘Anonymous’ (who suggests, “How’s about we all post under “anonymous?” That should give this complainant and her lawyer something to stew about.”).


“So when there is someone in the mix of the drug operations that is referred to as a “heat bag,” someone who is in the media or draws suspicion of law enforcement and public attention, then the drug operations usually discipline that “heat bag.” It is interesting how that has not transpired. There is no possible scenario that supports any other avenue of the sloppy police work. The issue that’s concerning is that the murderers are not being brought to justice, why? The evidence is there. The circumstances are ripe for the picking. The motive and opportunity was a blazing clue. It bares the suspicion that the SPD have been part of sabotaging Lindsay’s murder from the very beginning.

Being caught in their own ‘fake news’ to the public to the gigantic leap of “clearing” anyone of involvement or knowledge. Even us arm-chair (internet) detectives know that NO ONE IS CLEARED – TILL SOMEONE IS CHARGED! How utterly discreditable, sloppy and incompetent it was for the SPD to make that public statement. If they wanted to divert attention to the suspicious conduct of these OBVIOUS suspects, then they should have stated they were NOT OF INTEREST at this time. NOT EVER, EVER CLEARED THEM!

And herein lies the conundrum we are in today. But for the fact that had the Saanich Police Department executed their duties with integrity and professionalism to solve Lindsay’s murder, then there would be no silly alleged ‘defamation’ suit. notable and blatantly obvious to the general public is the absence of support and gumption by the Zailo family to seek every avenue of redress to assist in solving Lindsay’s murder. Why is that? Is the civil suit a motion to distract our attention from the truth?

Is it a diversion to scare and bully others from stating their opinions?

Is it an attempted ‘cash grab’ so Zailo can purchase more million dollar homes or buy more luxury vehicles/yachts? Why has this ‘defamed’ complainant not embarked and written all those entities the rest of us have in order to get Lindsay’s file removed from the SPD clutches and actually have someone charged for the brutal, violent murder of Lindsay? What EXACTLY have the Zailo’s contributed to society? Or are they too, a burden like the Bacon family?” Now these are questions I myself might ask but curiously Evelyn, Sandra and Garry don’t seem to be interested in any opposing ideas (which is why anybody who follows me should know I am obviously not in their camp).That leads me to wonder if they ever suffer from cognitive dissonance? They must do if they have ever read my blog so it is a mystery of the mind that they choose to continue to be followers (not unlike people who are involved in a cult and can’t imagine their way out).

Perhaps we can get some insight into this seemingly blind belief by reading Garry’s blog: 

GARRY RODGERS TWEETS: The imagination is literally the workshop wherein are fashioned all plans created by man. ~Napoleon Hill 

Garry seems to have some understanding of how people get sucked into believing untruths (ie conspiracy theories) when he writes:

 “These 4 reasons probably apply to most conspiracy theories and theorists”:

1. They don’t have the correct information to understand the case facts.

2. They haven’t got the personal knowledge, or experience, to properly interpret the evidence.

3. They simply want to believe in a conspiracy.

4, They don’t have the mental capacity for critical thought process.

But then he claims that it is safe to just rely on ‘gut feelings’:  “I have decades of investigation experience and, if there’s one thing I’ve learned, I’ve come to rely on my gut feelings—hunches, intuition, Grok, or whatever you wanna call them.”


Your gut instinct has been your ally. It’s that older, wiser friend who always has your back and stops you from making stupid decisions. When your gut tells you to pay attention, to be careful, to not trust someone, or to go right instead of left, you won’t question the information. You are in tune with your intuition. Chances are that on those rare occasions when you didn’t trust your gut, you regretted it. Just keep in mind that your logical reasoning is your ally too. It is not the antagonist to your intuition, it’s simply an additional source of information and a way to process it all. 

GARRY, maybe your intuition saved you once, but it doesn’t mean you should always rely on it 100%, It’s okay to pay attention to intuition, but it’s just as important, to pay attention to cognitive dissonance.


Fortunately, we have brilliant scientists who have investigated and reached more complex conclusions about intuition: “…what Hogarth proposes is that intuition is a result of implicit learning. You’re picking up on very complex patterns without explicit awareness or deliberate effort. You know how close to stand to somebody at a funeral, but it depends on their status, their closeness to the person, their emotional state, how you are feeling. It depends on all of these variables, but it depends on what part of the funeral it is. It depends on potential religious, there’s all these variables and they’re interacting in complex dynamic ways.

And you’ve picked that up and you don’t know how you’ve picked it up. You don’t know where and when. So you just get the intuition, “I should stand this close,” and you do it, and you’re right…Now, what’s the peril of this? So that’s its power. You pick up on complex patterns and you don’t do it deductively…Implicit learning doesn’t care what patterns it picks up…It doesn’t distinguish real causal patterns from correlational patterns, and there’s a lot more complex correlational patterns that aren’t real causal patterns.

And so we pick up on all kinds of complex patterns that are not real and we form intuitions around them, but when we don’t like our intuition, we don’t call it intuition, we call it bias or prejudice or racism or sexism or a whole bunch of other things…it’s given me a way of challenging a certain kind of decadent romanticism in the culture, which says that you should always trust your intuition.”  Professor John Vervaeke (University of Toronto)    


So I am suggesting that people do as I do when examining this case – pay attention to your intuition (but don’t always trust it) and any cognitive dissonance you might be feeling. Use your brains to sift through all of the information to reach intelligent theories and conclusions as to who might know more than they are telling us about what they know about just how and why Lindsay Buziak was so brutally murdered?????

Email Addresss: murderondesousa@gmail.com

%d bloggers like this: