AUS - Khandalyce Kiara Pearce (Wynarka) and mum Karlie Pearce-Stevenson (Belanglo) #9

[Wolfinator]

I had to ask for carer's age before quoting your post (I was remembering 25, but wasn't sure). If he was/is as young as that, I can't imagine him to be someone of a "syndicate" who takes decisions?

You could be a 10 year old Girl Scout and the noun syndicate could apply to you and your fellow guides.

1.a group of individuals or organizations combined to promote a common interest.

No suggestion in there that he was in charge. But if there has been drug trafficking involved we do know he and Connie had charges relating to commercial quantities.

I'm not really convinced that he was part of the mischief of fraud. I think he was hood winked like the rest of them.
And has either cashed in a story or dribbled it drunk at the end of a bar, is not the sharpest tool in the shed or at worst is trying to mess with the investigation.

It was asked by a poster, can't remember who, why some on here don't "like" the carer.

Riddle me this:

A young member of your family with a child leaves never to be seen again.

A relation/close family friend knows intimate details of a "bounty" with the presumption that violence will be the result.

Many years later the body of the CHILD and the mother turn up.

LE arrest a person for the murder of the mother and the investigation into the murder of the child is on going.

Said relative/friend many weeks in to the investigation decides it's time to tell crime stoppers what they know.

Wow what an incredible act of bravery - to be a "rat" But instead of working with LE, even if it takes a while to convince them, if you had to pound down the door etc, you take it upon yourself to go to the media?

Potentially - damaging investigative work in progress. Spooking those responsible. More evidence being destroyed. Potential collaborative witnesses get threatened and scared off.

I call BS - it's illogical. It took so long to offer the information. Fear can not be the excuse because 10 days later you're chatting with the Adelaide advertiser.

Obviously I could be completely wrong on this - as we all could.

What it has done though has shed light that clearly Karlie was not a nun. She was covering serious miles with very little money and there is evidence of drugs and drug takers around her associates. Yes she was a wild one. Regardless, she didn't deserve to be stomped to death and Kandalyce, well there's no words to describe that one.

So yes, I'm not a fan of the reckless "carer" who to my mind could have put the investigation in jeopardy and as such is treated with healthy skepticism.


IMO

 

[Puggle]

Surely she would have had legal advice before submitting a claim and representation, I wonder why the children were left out.....I would expect any legal representative to include this as a part of any claim

Yeah I agree....the lawyer wouldn't be doing his/her job if they didn't suggest their inclusion.

So I really don't know to be 100% sure.....

I'm currently involved in a class action and was originally told I could put in for damages for a number of things.... I only submitted claims based on what I personally (morally) felt I was entitled too...others in class action may put in for all the items that the lawyers said we could.

Maybe it just came down to her not wanting too include them......

I know that thought probably doesn't gel - if she's ever eventually charged and convicted for fraud...

But yeah that was the only thing I could think of why she may have left them out of her claim..

 

[sosocurious]

It doesn't make sense that the "Mother" wouldn't make a claim for*all* If she is the fraudster...(Not my words)...could it be conceived at all possible that Hazel in this claim was being genuine??.....

Maybe she didn't blame Daniel for the loss of her children as it was an accident....and she loved him??

But on the grounds of the *Accident* her claims were genuine.

A. Loss of Potential future income due to her disability

and B: Medical costs.

A and B are true...


Sorry also have to address the idea that the hire company could instigate a claim.....Only claim they could initiate would be for the loss of the vehicle......they wouldn't initiate any further claim on the occupants behalf - as that has nothing to do with them.

I agree about the hire company Puggle.

‘There’s something peculiar about this matter... two children were killed in this collision but the claim does not refer to that,’ Master Mark Rice said.
‘She’s entitled to damages for the deaths of the children, as well as burial and funeral costs, in the ordinary course.’
Master Rice recommended Ms Passmore change her claim to include the deaths of her two children.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...former-partner-car-crash-left-wheelchair.html

"There has been a lot of press about this lady and the defendant, when I looked at the statement of claim I thought there must be another accident but there isn't, there is only one.
"It just doesn't mention the fact that two of her children were killed, that ought to happen sooner rather than later."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-08/hazel-passmore-seeks-compensation-from-daniel-marshall/7009714

It doesn't make sense, does it?
Even if she did not blame DH for the death of her children and she loved him, she was entitled to compensation in ordinary course for the children.
I can not imagine any solicitor overlooking that.
Why no mention of the children at all in the claim or the psychological damage associated with the loss for their mother?

As Master Rice said it would be easy to assume there was another accident, but there isn't ....

 

[Karo]

If my children were killed in an accident, I would not seek compensation.
What would I do with that money?
how would I feel spending it?
would I be able to use it for anything?
a holiday?
a house?
a car?
how would I feel?

I agree about the hire company Puggle.

‘There’s something peculiar about this matter... two children were killed in this collision but the claim does not refer to that,’ Master Mark Rice said.
‘She’s entitled to damages for the deaths of the children, as well as burial and funeral costs, in the ordinary course.’
Master Rice recommended Ms Passmore change her claim to include the deaths of her two children.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...former-partner-car-crash-left-wheelchair.html

"There has been a lot of press about this lady and the defendant, when I looked at the statement of claim I thought there must be another accident but there isn't, there is only one.
"It just doesn't mention the fact that two of her children were killed, that ought to happen sooner rather than later."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-08/hazel-passmore-seeks-compensation-from-daniel-marshall/7009714

It doesn't make sense, does it?
Even if she did not blame DH for the death of her children and she loved him, she was entitled to compensation in ordinary course for the children.
I can not imagine any solicitor overlooking that.
Why no mention of the children at all in the claim or the psychological damage associated with the loss for their mother?

As Master Rice said it would be easy to assume there was another accident, but there isn't ....

 

[plongi]

 

[Maggie_May]

I got the impression at one stage it was for backpackers now DinkyDi? I drive past it almost every day now, so you get used to what you see, but I'll look more carefully tomorrow!

I guess the pics could have the date, but it just seems a bit off to me

 

[JaneSA]

Jane was it you that pinpointed which eating place it was in the Marion plaza where the pic was taken? Whoever it was mentioned removal of pot plants or refurbishment or something. Maybe that's worth a crime stoppers call to help them establish a firm date?

Yes, it was me, but I felt sure the police had the date of those pics.
They seem very certain of the date so I assume the digital timestamp would confirm it.

 

[JaneSA]

If my children were killed in an accident, I would not seek compensation.
What would I do with that money?
how would I feel spending it?
would I be able to use it for anything?
a holiday?
a house?
a car?
how would I feel?

I agree with you.
I wouldn't ever consider it.
How can money possibly compensate?
And if it was suggested to me, I'd feel revolted by the idea.

 

[Maggie_May]

Porridge you sure would think so wouldn't you...but interestingly, I had the "pleasure" of briefing said Patrick Liptak in a matter some years back now, and though he has had the intervening years to hone his craft, and I would expect him to be much more experienced and sophisticated by now, I did experience him as a somewhat singleminded young man who didn't take on other people's opinions and wishes very readily and that included his clients'...

Surely she would have had legal advice before submitting a claim and representation, I wonder why the children were left out.....I would expect any legal representative to include this as a part of any claim

 

[1968]

Yeah I agree....the lawyer wouldn't be doing his/her job if they didn't suggest their inclusion.

So I really don't know to be 100% sure.....

I'm currently involved in a class action and was originally told I could put in for damages for a number of things.... I only submitted claims based on what I personally (morally) felt I was entitled too...others in class action may put in for all the items that the lawyers said we could.

Maybe it just came down to her not wanting too include them......

I know that thought probably doesn't gel - if she's ever eventually charged and convicted for fraud...

But yeah that was the only thing I could think of why she may have left them out of her claim..

Great post Puggle.

I agree also. It is the only thing that if you like " makes sense".

She knew Holdom was mega messed up about the death of the kids in the accident.
Maybe she felt to blame too, as possibly (due to being thrown from the vehicle)
her children were not wearing seat belts, which may have saved their lives.

I know some have come to think of HP as the criminal mastermind, but I still think that she was in some ways "in thrall" to DH.

 

[Maggie_May]

I tend to agree with people indicating they would feel awful about claiming for the loss of their children, but it is actually not just common but a very standard "formula" part of such claims to include suing for the death of dependants and/or other family members in such cases of loss and I'm sure that is why Master Rice was so surprised and has made the comments and requests that he is reported to have made.

Interesting to speculate on any/no connection between Bill Boucaut and Patrick Liptak as the two legal eagles connected to HP as far as we know from MSM...though BB could easily be using PL as his solicitor/alternative counsel.

I agree with you.
I wouldn't ever consider it.
How can money possibly compensate?
And if it was suggested to me, I'd feel revolted by the idea.

 

[sosocurious]

If my children were killed in an accident, I would not seek compensation.
What would I do with that money?
how would I feel spending it?
would I be able to use it for anything?
a holiday?
a house?
a car?
how would I feel?

Not having been in the situation I do not know what I would do.
Would you try and retrieve the costs as ordinary course? eg funerals.

The fact there is a claim before the courts it just seems in my opinion very odd that the children are not mentioned.
If only to further support psychological damage that HP must have/is experienced on top of her own life long disabilities.
imo

 

[Maggie_May]

Absolutely - as per my previous comment this is so customary as we tend to understand and expect that a) the death of loved ones incurs additional stressful expenses associated with funerals as well of course as you say the psychological damages she would be suing for are tremendously backed up by not only her serious and life-changing injuries but also the massive loss and grief and ongoing psychological damage involved in losing one's little children. Whatever I/we may think of HP in the opinions we have formed of her so far, in pure terms of viewing her for the purposes of this thread as a mother who has incurred unimaginable loss, the entitlements of anyone in her situation (completely separating it from fraud/any other matters which may be revealed in the trial) are enormous IMO.

Not having been in the situation I do not know what I would do.
Would you try and retrieve the costs as ordinary course? eg funerals.

The fact there is a claim before the courts it just seems in my opinion very odd that the children are not mentioned.
If only to further support psychological damage that HP must have/is experienced on top of her own life long disabilities.
imo

 

[DinkyDi]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...ed-breakthrough-in-suitcase-girl-case/6873196

Btw: The friend from Marion was tracked by police and didn't call Crime Stoppers on their own - I always understood so. I assume, the first caller had a connection to the second caller and maybe told police to ask this person for further infos?

With a certain date of the photos I can't serve you.

Interesting you took it to mean that the police tracked them down, I was of the belief that they called crime stoppers as per this paragraph

Police then received a second phone call from a witness who had taken photos of Khandalyce at Marion Shopping Centre in Adelaide, wearing the same pink dress found in the suitcase near her remains.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-22/body-dumped-at-belanglo-to-throw-police-off-track/6875768

 

[DinkyDi]

Evanston park postcode also includes Hillbank

 

[DinkyDi]

You could be a 10 year old Girl Scout and the noun syndicate could apply to you and your fellow guides.

1.a group of individuals or organizations combined to promote a common interest.


No suggestion in there that he was in charge. But if there has been drug trafficking involved we do know he and Connie had charges relating to commercial quantities.

I'm not really convinced that he was part of the mischief of fraud. I think he was hood winked like the rest of them.
And has either cashed in a story or dribbled it drunk at the end of a bar, is not the sharpest tool in the shed or at worst is trying to mess with the investigation.

It was asked by a poster, can't remember who, why some on here don't "like" the carer.

Riddle me this:

A young member of your family with a child leaves never to be seen again.

A relation/close family friend knows intimate details of a "bounty" with the presumption that violence will be the result.

Many years later the body of the CHILD and the mother turn up.

LE arrest a person for the murder of the mother and the investigation into the murder of the child is on going.

Said relative/friend many weeks in to the investigation decides it's time to tell crime stoppers what they know.

Wow what an incredible act of bravery - to be a "rat" But instead of working with LE, even if it takes a while to convince them, if you had to pound down the door etc, you take it upon yourself to go to the media?

Potentially - damaging investigative work in progress. Spooking those responsible. More evidence being destroyed. Potential collaborative witnesses get threatened and scared off.

I call BS - it's illogical. It took so long to offer the information. Fear can not be the excuse because 10 days later you're chatting with the Adelaide advertiser.

Obviously I could be completely wrong on this - as we all could.

What it has done though has shed light that clearly Karlie was not a nun. She was covering serious miles with very little money and there is evidence of drugs and drug takers around her associates. Yes she was a wild one. Regardless, she didn't deserve to be stomped to death and Kandalyce, well there's no words to describe that one.

So yes, I'm not a fan of the reckless "carer" who to my mind could have put the investigation in jeopardy and as such is treated with healthy skepticism.


IMO

Riddle answer; around the same age as HP also from Tin Can Bay Area!!

 

[inkpink]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/sa/a/30307993/man-charged-with-murder-sued-over-crash/

The documents list her extensive injuries which include the leg amputation above the knee, head injuries, a severe laceration to the right leg and an abdominal injury.

BBM - I wonder what the extent of her head injures were.

 

[plongi]

Yep fixed now Is Elizabeth not Hillbank

Evanston park postcode also includes Hillbank

 

[DinkyDi]

Yep fixed now Is Elizabeth not Hillbank

Hillbank is the same postcode as Elizabeth.

 

[sosocurious]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/sa/a/30307993/man-charged-with-murder-sued-over-crash/

The documents list her extensive injuries which include the leg amputation above the knee, head injuries, a severe laceration to the right leg and an abdominal injury.

BBM - I wonder what the extent of her head injures were.

Closed head injury
Loss of right leg above the knee.
Loss of use of left leg.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au
https://www.facebook.com/seanfewster/posts/948736261829330

Defining closed head injury
This guideline uses the terms ‘closed head injury’ and ‘mild,
moderate or severe head injury’ to identify and classify
patients on arrival to hospital. The outcome following
presentation with a ‘closed head injury’ will vary from rapid
complete recovery to a mixture of structural lesions and
functional deficits ranging from trivial to life threatening.
The terms “concussion” and “traumatic brain injury” refer
to the patient outcome following their initial presentation
with a “closed head injury” and are retrospective
diagnoses. Important functional deficits following ‘closed
head injury’ range from post concussion symptoms and
post traumatic amnesia to a variety of disabling persistent
physical-cognitive-behavioural-social sequelae.
http://www.aci.health.nsw.gov.au/__...osed_Head_Injury_CPG_2nd_Ed_Full_document.pdf

Loss of use of left leg .... does raise a question as to the prosthetic leg that was left behind in 2011.