Australia Claremont Serial Killer, 1996 - 1997, Perth, Western Australia - #6
- Thread starter Sillybilly
- Start date
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #187- Latest: StarryStarryNight
-
-
Spain Jay Slater, 19, missing on holiday in Tenerife, 17 June 2024 #5
- Latest: imstilla.grandma
- Status
MyLeftFoot
Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2015
- Messages
- 212
- Reaction score
- 4
Further to my last post. What happens in court...
We've all seen the media say "evidence was contaminated". No comment by police.
Brett Christian from the 'Post' saying this and that. No comment from police.
Suspects and POI's no longer of interest. No comment by police.
So fast forward into the court process..
Defence says evidence was contaminated. But now they have to prove that because it was never admitted to by LE.
Defence claims information released to the public (the Post) was factually correct or faulty or deceiving or discriminatory in any way ...But it was never endorsed by LE.
Defence says that LE never pursued other alternative suspects who was were just as likely to have committed these offences. They can't because throughout the entire investigation, no one was publically exonerated by LE.
We've all seen the media say "evidence was contaminated". No comment by police.
Brett Christian from the 'Post' saying this and that. No comment from police.
Suspects and POI's no longer of interest. No comment by police.
So fast forward into the court process..
Defence says evidence was contaminated. But now they have to prove that because it was never admitted to by LE.
Defence claims information released to the public (the Post) was factually correct or faulty or deceiving or discriminatory in any way ...But it was never endorsed by LE.
Defence says that LE never pursued other alternative suspects who was were just as likely to have committed these offences. They can't because throughout the entire investigation, no one was publically exonerated by LE.
What is the point in waiting till they are out? can't they just charge someone who is in prison already?
Just slap the 3x life sentences onto what they are serving and wrap the case up
MyLeftFoot
Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2015
- Messages
- 212
- Reaction score
- 4
None that were admitted to by LE.
But I'm sure we can speculate that not releasing the footage earlier was a mistake
Saying "We got our man" early in the piece was akin to "our one and only suspect" in the Lloyd Rayney case.
The very public surveillance of LW which drew so much criticism and publically pointed the finger at one suspect who they were subsequently unable to prosecute because of lack of evidence or because the evidence was too circumstantial.
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
They are in prison. Police do it right at the end so they can extend the prison time out some more. Evidence accrues. If someones in prison, what's the point? They are in prison.
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
But that was all a ploy. As we have since discovered. They were hoping someone was going to have another go while they had someone else. The cops didnt want MM knowing they had him on camera. Hardly a mistake.
For all you know, it was all theatre.
For all you know, it was all theatre.
MyLeftFoot
Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2015
- Messages
- 212
- Reaction score
- 4
The things is Crabby..we don't know what is a ploy and what is not. What you say is feasible speculation... but still speculation.
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
The fact that they held the video of MM against their chest for years, suggests they didn't want him to know they had him, and they didn't want him to run. But he may have already done that They dumped the video in the media at the point they had cleared POIs.
They were still identifying people in the video up till last year. But they are identifying with the help of others. And they rocking up to peoples houses to DNA test them. The interesting thing is, they are not questioning them. That suggests to me, they have DNA, and they are eliminating it.
They were still identifying people in the video up till last year. But they are identifying with the help of others. And they rocking up to peoples houses to DNA test them. The interesting thing is, they are not questioning them. That suggests to me, they have DNA, and they are eliminating it.
MyLeftFoot
Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2015
- Messages
- 212
- Reaction score
- 4
The fact that they held the video of MM against their chest for years, suggests they didn't want him to know they had him, and they didn't want him to run. But he may have already done that.
They were still identifying people in the video up till last year. But they are identifying with the help of others. And they rocking up to peoples houses to DNA test them. The interesting thing is, they are not questioning them. That suggests to me, they have DNA, and they are eliminating it.
Maybe!
But if he was such an important POI,( since he still sits on the Crimestoppers website), why haven't they enhanced the footage by now? Surely technology has advanced over 20 years?
Is he just a token offering to distract the public?
Where are all the other unsolved murders on the Crimestoppers site?
Is the Crimestoppers website poorly managed or artfully discriminate?
Who knows?
Clearly there is not much transparency anywhere!
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
The video footage is not enhanceable partly because it is analogue. I think they just want to know who he is. Maybe they have found him and not told you. Its all part of catching people. There is a difference between transparency and giving the game away.
Someone mentioned on this site Im sure why some are there and some are not. Have you some that are missing?
Someone mentioned on this site Im sure why some are there and some are not. Have you some that are missing?
CSK?
Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2016
- Messages
- 325
- Reaction score
- 11
My theory on MM vid taking so long to surface....
Police concentrate on a couple of POI'S, killings stop because of this focus, investigation goes dead. Police invent MM in the hope the light being shone in a different direction some how gets the CSK to come out of the shadows so police can gain further evidence.
Police concentrate on a couple of POI'S, killings stop because of this focus, investigation goes dead. Police invent MM in the hope the light being shone in a different direction some how gets the CSK to come out of the shadows so police can gain further evidence.
MyLeftFoot
Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2015
- Messages
- 212
- Reaction score
- 4
Jane Rimmer video released too late, says detective
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/video-too-late-says-top-cop/story-e6frg12c-1111117340186
So by the time 2004 rocked around and the Schramm Review was conducted, Paul Schramm stated that the footage should have been released much earlier and that it was probably of little value now, as the film was considered to have been outdated (in 2004)
Paul Schramm sates -
Clearly, its common sense to say that the closer you release this sort of footage to the event, then the more advantageous it is. So yes, if it was going to be released, its best it be released earlier.
Certainly with the passing of time, the likelihood of an identification had diminished.
Det-Supt Schramm doubted the mystery man seen speaking to Ms Rimmer could be identified from the poor-quality vision, 12 years after the event.
I think that in every investigation thats under constant review, you do reach a time when you have to reassess those decisions and in hindsight, it may have been better to have made a decision to release that footage earlier than now, he said.
Part of the investigation was to either rule this mystery person in or out.
"Whether that person had anything to do with the investigation, certainly the review team thought unlikely but with hindsight, certainly it may have been better to release it in closer proximity to the event.
Make of that what you will!
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/video-too-late-says-top-cop/story-e6frg12c-1111117340186
So by the time 2004 rocked around and the Schramm Review was conducted, Paul Schramm stated that the footage should have been released much earlier and that it was probably of little value now, as the film was considered to have been outdated (in 2004)
Paul Schramm sates -
Clearly, its common sense to say that the closer you release this sort of footage to the event, then the more advantageous it is. So yes, if it was going to be released, its best it be released earlier.
Certainly with the passing of time, the likelihood of an identification had diminished.
Det-Supt Schramm doubted the mystery man seen speaking to Ms Rimmer could be identified from the poor-quality vision, 12 years after the event.
I think that in every investigation thats under constant review, you do reach a time when you have to reassess those decisions and in hindsight, it may have been better to have made a decision to release that footage earlier than now, he said.
Part of the investigation was to either rule this mystery person in or out.
"Whether that person had anything to do with the investigation, certainly the review team thought unlikely but with hindsight, certainly it may have been better to release it in closer proximity to the event.
Make of that what you will!
MyLeftFoot
Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2015
- Messages
- 212
- Reaction score
- 4
Timeline
1997, Macro identifies LW as the prime suspect.
2002, Con Bayens boot lined suspect is dismissed by Mr Caporn ( Don't worry Con, we got our man)
2004, The explanation offered to Paul Schramm (for not releasing the footage), is that the review team
had formed the opinion that MM's involvement in the investigation was considered unlikely.
2008, LW is supposedly no longer of interest and the footage is finally released.
2016, The footage now sits on Crimestoppers website awaiting identification of MM
If Paul Schramm thought that the footage was too stale in 2004, it must have been archival in 2008 and almost pre-historic in 2016!
1997, Macro identifies LW as the prime suspect.
2002, Con Bayens boot lined suspect is dismissed by Mr Caporn ( Don't worry Con, we got our man)
2004, The explanation offered to Paul Schramm (for not releasing the footage), is that the review team
had formed the opinion that MM's involvement in the investigation was considered unlikely.
2008, LW is supposedly no longer of interest and the footage is finally released.
2016, The footage now sits on Crimestoppers website awaiting identification of MM
If Paul Schramm thought that the footage was too stale in 2004, it must have been archival in 2008 and almost pre-historic in 2016!
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
I dont think anyone knew him, not even his house mates. Thats pretty rhetorical really, nothing we dont know that the earlier the image comes out, the easier it is identify the back of someones head in black pants and a white shirt in a dodgy noisy video. How many people wear white shirt and black pants. Taxi drivers?
Maybe one the bar staff at a local pub not far?
Maybe the cops should have asked Ross what accent dialect this person may have had. Were his phonetics Australian?
So according Ross, Sarah went Windsor hotel instead her flat. On 112 Mill Point road. Someone said Sarahs parents lived on Mill Point road. But not confirmed.
They know is first name (Could be false, so he worked for cash? But being a student, he may have had a TFN), he worked in hospitality as a student, he drove a Commodore.
The cops could run TFN on all the pubs for that year nearby for students in hospitality. Cutler was at an industry Parmelia hotel hospitality staff function,(14 Mill st) or along those lines.
The Post
ABC.net.au
Maybe one the bar staff at a local pub not far?
Maybe the cops should have asked Ross what accent dialect this person may have had. Were his phonetics Australian?
So according Ross, Sarah went Windsor hotel instead her flat. On 112 Mill Point road. Someone said Sarahs parents lived on Mill Point road. But not confirmed.
They know is first name (Could be false, so he worked for cash? But being a student, he may have had a TFN), he worked in hospitality as a student, he drove a Commodore.
The cops could run TFN on all the pubs for that year nearby for students in hospitality. Cutler was at an industry Parmelia hotel hospitality staff function,(14 Mill st) or along those lines.
The Post
ABC.net.au
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
I think police need to get TFN of all the hospitality students in the area, maybe the Parmelia hotel (1988), and surrounding pubs of Claremont area. Not a hard task really. Look for NFA addresses etc (1996-1997)
Any TFN anomalies like overseas students etc. I wonder if the girls mentioning he was a student of hospitality, or UNI? That he might have been in hospitality, and a uni student?
He could have been an international student studying at the local UWA university? Bay rd Claremont?
Sounds like he may have come over to study, but worked in hospitality? They have a first name.
Any TFN anomalies like overseas students etc. I wonder if the girls mentioning he was a student of hospitality, or UNI? That he might have been in hospitality, and a uni student?
He could have been an international student studying at the local UWA university? Bay rd Claremont?
Sounds like he may have come over to study, but worked in hospitality? They have a first name.
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 39,332
- Reaction score
- 117,413
Posts are not being self-deleted .. they have been unapproved by Mods/Admin and we do not discuss removed posts or moderation on the thread.
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
Surely police ran the car model against this students given name to house mates? The car was 2 years old at best so car ownership records would have been shallow for the particular model. Then those names could have been run through the ATO database etc, not to mention whether there was an Australian citizen involved.
I have a feeling this person is linked to other persons as I cant see how someone would do it on their own. Wasn't the car described by witnesses in Ciaras liason with a white Commodore containing more than one person in the vehicle?
The forensic link is with Ciara
https://www.scribd.com/doc/285268021/POST-Newspaper-for-17th-of-October-2015
I have a feeling this person is linked to other persons as I cant see how someone would do it on their own. Wasn't the car described by witnesses in Ciaras liason with a white Commodore containing more than one person in the vehicle?
The forensic link is with Ciara
https://www.scribd.com/doc/285268021/POST-Newspaper-for-17th-of-October-2015
crabstick
Former Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,315
- Reaction score
- 16
And this is why people may have been cleared, apart from DNA elimination (Does not mean they are not an accessory the person at the scene with DNA).
Any current POI could be an accessory to the DNA a the scene. There were multiple persons in the vehicle Ciara approached which suggests more than one person is very feasible.
A person may have been cleared because a court order might have been granted to clear the persons name as a POI even though POI has no legal definition. So someone with the cash might have a court order for clearance and suppression. This may help in the case example of Rainey who sued police for defamation of character. One CSK POI I believe wants $10 million for defamation of character.
BearBears link explains Person of Interest
Any current POI could be an accessory to the DNA a the scene. There were multiple persons in the vehicle Ciara approached which suggests more than one person is very feasible.
A person may have been cleared because a court order might have been granted to clear the persons name as a POI even though POI has no legal definition. So someone with the cash might have a court order for clearance and suppression. This may help in the case example of Rainey who sued police for defamation of character. One CSK POI I believe wants $10 million for defamation of character.
BearBears link explains Person of Interest
- Status