How did police discover that the clothes line used to bind Karrakatta was impregnated with screen printing ink? She either had a section of the rope with her when she escaped/was released or police went back to the area and were able to located the binding.
So why was there confusion about the rope being telephone cable?
Police may not have released to the media that it was clothes line and they could have either told the media the wrong information (telephone cable) or the media may have got their info from another source (victim, victims family, incorrect police leak etc)
But there's another issue with this information;
They searched the printing business in the Olifants building circa 2011. As you suggest, for police to detect printing screen printing ink on the rope then they must have some rope from Karra. Why did it take them over a decade to work out the rope had screen printing ink on it?
Scenario 1
- Karra victim is let go and is still tied up with the clothes line rope OR police search cemetery next day and recover the rope
- Media report telphone cable for whatever reason. The info is wrong. Not unusual, especially early in a case
- Police test rope and discover printing ink trace
- They don't know where it is from and that info stays in the file
- Macro do forensic test of CG site, find same ink but don't realise until 2011-ish
This scenario is unlikely. There were 8 reviews. As far as I'm aware other sex crimes in the area were checked out thoroughly both by Macro and the reviews. I'd be astounded if this level of incompetence was reached.
Scenario 2
- Karra victim is let go and is still tied up with the clothes line rope OR police search cemetery next day and recover the rope
- Media report telephone cable for whatever reason. The info is wrong. Not unusual, especially early in a case
- Police test rope and discover printing ink trace
- They don't know where it is from and that info stays in the file
- Fast forward to 2011 and someone goes the extra mile - they have a hunch the crimes are related. They noticed in the Karra file that there's a trace of printing ink, go test something from CG's evidence box and find a match.
This is a lot more likely that Scenario 1, but it's still a stretch. Surely if there was ink trace on anything at CG site they would have picked it up? Is it possible that it was untraceable in 1997 but due to tech advances traceable in 2011?
So what do we know
- Macro made inquiries in 2011 about the picture framing and screen printing business
- They asked the former owner is any printing components were missing or if there was any rope left around at the time, or if there was an old clothes line out the back
- The printing business is 30m from where SS was last seen and directly across Stirling Hwy from where CG was last seen
- The printing business has a car park out the back making it quite secluded and a good base to blitz attack someone from
- The Post claims it was about this time (2011) that Macro got a DNA link between CG and Karra. It also suggests fibres on the rope from Karra.
Scenario 3
- Macro get a more comprehensive DNA profile in 2011
- They compare to Karra. It's a 1 in 500 match. Not enough to be 100% but given the timing, area, similarities, Macro strongly think it's the same guy.
- They switch focus on trying to solve Karra rape. They know if they can solve this, the chances are they will find the evidence for CSK too
- They pull out the case file and now the rope impregnated with ink fibres has a place to start looking. If Karra and CSK is same guy then that means blitz attack more likely and poses the question "we think CSK is local so where does the ink come from?"
- A quick search tells them there was a printing business 30m from where both SS and CG were last seen, and also a good base for a blitz attack.
- There is no actual ink link between karra and CG - DNA is the link and the ink was just a lead.
