AUS - Khandalyce Kiara Pearce, Wynarka, Bones of a Child Discovered, July'15 - #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
hideoustroll said:
I'm pretty sure we had a tablecloth made from that exact pumpkin fabric in our break room at work in the early 2000's and it wouldn't have been new then. You're probably right about it being from the 90's.
Click to expand...

I remember the tablecloths too. Oven mitts, etc. I think this is a quintessentially 90's style in fabrics.
 
Posting this link once again. It may pay to bookmark this site. It is being continually updated and is a good reference for police media releases.

Task Force Mallee

The following are media releases, photographs and press conferences relating to the discovery of a child's skeletal remains near the Karoonda Highway about 2kms west of Wynarka in the Murray Mallee region. The remains were located by a member of the public on 14 July 2015, with police advised early 15 July. Anyone with information about the matter is urged to call Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or report online at https://sa.crimestoppers.com.au/

These items are in chronological order - with the oldest items at the bottom of the page.

https://www.police.sa.gov.au/sa-pol...y-mallee-local-service-area/task-force-mallee
 
catswhiskers said:
I think I've found the coat - not pink, but the flowers match the latest enhanced image on the SAPOL poster.
View attachment 79476

Here is the ebay listing - I searched completed listings for more examples.

Girls Winter Coat

Here's the tag on the coat but it's almost hidden by the fur - I can't make it out.

View attachment 79477
Click to expand...

Great find catswhiskers! And RougeRogue you are right! Catswhiskers label matches this label from a pair of H+T purple jeans on ebay:
h+tlabel.jpg catswhiskerscoattag.PNG
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Girls-Si...d-H-T-Pants-/171879541708?hash=item2804d1abcc
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/GORGEOUS...D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557
 
I have a theory that would account for what happened to the girl, the remains, the suitcase etc.
I'll leave out the reason why she died/had to die, cause that could have been any reason, unwanted child, incest child, murdered mother, criminal parents on the run, pedophiles etc.

What had been lingering in the back of my mind is the style difference of the clothing/quilt found with the suitcase/remains.

The quilt, the black tutu dress and the black smilie t-shirt are totally different, style wise, from the pink girlie clothes, coat, most shorts, dresses, sweatpants and pink top.
The red shorts and the Holden shorts are another 'category'.

The black tutu dress, the quilt and the smilie t-shirt are the only items that (as far as I can see) show actual decomposition and holes in it. Like that has been with the remains from the moment of death and for some considerable time after that.

What if (sorry it's graphic) what happened is somewhat like this:

Someone lets the child, who is wearing the black tutu dress sit down on the quilt pretending they're going to play a game. Lets her cover her eyes for a surprise and shoots her from behind (head?). Covers the mess with the smilie t-shirt, wraps her in the quilt and buries her (at the spot). Leaves her there for some years until there is a nescessity to remove the remains from that spot.

That person strolls around at textile containers (do you have those in Australia?) or dumps, picks out some pinky girlie clothes in the right size, the holden shorts and the red & white boys shorts and makes sure that some items are recently sold (maybe even buys them), cause I heard Des Bray mention that some of the items were sold 2 years ago at K-mart.

Finds an old suitcase somewhere, puts all the stuff in there and digs up the remains in the quilt and puts it with the other items in the suitcase . And subsequently puts the suitcase and everything in it in the water at a hidden spot at another location in order to erase as much evidence/DNA as possible.

Until either that person wants closure, the circumstances have changed, like someone involved has died or is dying, or the spot where the suitcase is kept is no longer safe like the hideout being sold.

So the road is finished, road workers left items like the straw hat, a glove etc.
The killer? retrieves the suitcase, takes it to where it will be found and takes the quilt, the remains (and the smilie shirt?) out of the suitcase and hides it at the bush. Collects items from the road workers to distract forensics and leaves those with the remains.

Zips up the suitcase, throws it in a bush at a spot where it will likely be found and voilà.
The rest is 'suitcase history'.

Lots of DNA from innocent people, a massively contaminated crime scene. And DNA that has been both burried and soaked in water for years.

So what I would be looking at to solve this, is the remains, the quilt, black dress and the smilie shirt for the year she most likely died in. Then look for property being sold or landscape changes that would reveal the burreal site around two years ago, when some of the clothing was sold at K mart. Make an apeal to people who got rid of the same Lanza suitcase around two years ago. And find a reason why the remains were left at the road around March (motive).
 
DutchTreat said:
I have a theory that would account for what happened to the girl, the remains, the suitcase etc.
I'll leave out the reason why she died/had to die, cause that could have been any reason, unwanted child, incest child, murdered mother, criminal parents on the run, pedophiles etc.

What had been lingering in the back of my mind is the style difference of the clothing/quilt found with the suitcase/remains.

The quilt, the black tutu dress and the black smilie t-shirt are totally different, style wise, from the pink girlie clothes, coat, most shorts, dresses, sweatpants and pink top.
The red shorts and the Holden shorts are another 'category'.

The black tutu dress, the quilt and the smilie t-shirt are the only items that (as far as I can see) show actual decomposition and holes in it. Like that has been with the remains from the moment of death and for some considerable time after that.

What if (sorry it's graphic) what happened is somewhat like this:

Someone lets the child, who is wearing the black tutu dress sit down on the quilt pretending they're going to play a game. Lets her cover her eyes for a surprise and shoots her from behind (head?). Covers the mess with the smilie t-shirt, wraps her in the quilt and buries her (at the spot). Leaves her there for some years until there is a nescessity to remove the remains from that spot.

That person strolls around at textile containers (do you have those in Australia?) or dumps, picks out some pinky girlie clothes in the right size, the holden shorts and the red & white boys shorts and makes sure that some items are recently sold (maybe even buys them), cause I heard Des Bray mention that some of the items were sold 2 years ago at K-mart.

Finds an old suitcase somewhere, puts all the stuff in there and digs up the remains in the quilt and puts it with the other items in the suitcase . And subsequently puts the suitcase and everything in it in the water at a hidden spot at another location in order to erase as much evidence/DNA as possible.

Until either that person wants closure, the circumstances have changed, like someone involved has died or is dying, or the spot where the suitcase is kept is no longer safe like the hideout being sold.

So the road is finished, road workers left items like the straw hat, a glove etc.
The killer? retrieves the suitcase, takes it to where it will be found and takes the quilt, the remains (and the smilie shirt?) out of the suitcase and hides it at the bush. Collects items from the road workers to distract forensics and leaves those with the remains.

Zips up the suitcase, throws it in a bush at a spot where it will likely be found and voilà.
The rest is 'suitcase history'.

Lots of DNA from innocent people, a massively contaminated crime scene. And DNA that has been both burried and soaked in water for years.

So what I would be looking at to solve this, is the remains, the quilt, black dress and the smilie shirt for the year she most likely died in. Then look for property being sold or landscape changes that would reveal the burreal site around two years ago, when some of the clothing was sold at K mart. Make an apeal to people who got rid of the same Lanza suitcase around two years ago. And find a reason why the remains were left at the road around March (motive).
Click to expand...

Interesting points, but I still don't get why someone would go to efforts to add in clothing that didn't belong to the girl just to throw people off the scent. If the person who murdered the poor girl wanted to destroy evidence, they could have buried the bones deeply in an obscure place and burned the clothes, or thrown everything in the river at separate times so that in the unlikely event of anything being found, no connection would be made between the disparate items. The remains and clothes look like a killer's momentoes, imho, which a killer often keeps close to home then later exposes to police in order to manipulate them and send them on a wild goose chase for his own kicks.

I'm really just speculating but if this case was something like a house of horrors scenario - and it surely must be to do with some weird family or another - there would be all sorts of clothes around, from several siblings male and female and from adults. Perhaps little care was taken to organise the clothes and everything was a big jumble. No-one cared what what the child was buried with, and maybe just grabbed some extra items, some of which may date from years after the murder and original burial / storage, to pad out the suitcase.
 
AtaraMalka said:
Interesting points, but I still don't get why someone would go to efforts to add in clothing that didn't belong to the girl just to throw people off the scent. If the person who murdered the poor girl wanted to destroy evidence, they could have buried the bones deeply in an obscure place and burned the clothes, or thrown everything in the river at separate times so that in the unlikely event of anything being found, no connection would be made between the disparate items. The remains and clothes look like a killer's momentoes, imho, which a killer often keeps close to home then later exposes to police in order to manipulate them and send them on a wild goose chase for his own kicks.

I'm really just speculating but if this case was something like a house of horrors scenario - and it surely must be to do with some weird family or another - there would be all sorts of clothes around, from several siblings male and female and from adults. Perhaps little care was taken to organise the clothes and everything was a big jumble. No-one cared what what the child was buried with, and maybe just grabbed some extra items, some of which may date from years after the murder and original burial / storage, to pad out the suitcase.
Click to expand...

What if that person did care for the girl. And kept her around for years. But that time is getting short (maybe dying) and wants the girl found and for her to get a proper burial, but does not want to be discovered as being the one that killed her, or 'just' hid the remains for all those years.

But I wouldn't be surprised one bit if this turns out to be a local story after all.

I think someone did care what she was buried in. And killed her in her prettiest dress. And it could very well be that she had to die for some reason according to the killer, but that this person also cared for her and couldn't bring himself (herself?) to change the clothes after she would have died.
 
DutchTreat said:
I have a theory that would account for what happened to the girl, the remains, the suitcase etc.
I'll leave out the reason why she died/had to die, cause that could have been any reason, unwanted child, incest child, murdered mother, criminal parents on the run, pedophiles etc.

What had been lingering in the back of my mind is the style difference of the clothing/quilt found with the suitcase/remains.

The quilt, the black tutu dress and the black smilie t-shirt are totally different, style wise, from the pink girlie clothes, coat, most shorts, dresses, sweatpants and pink top.
The red shorts and the Holden shorts are another 'category'.

The black tutu dress, the quilt and the smilie t-shirt are the only items that (as far as I can see) show actual decomposition and holes in it. Like that has been with the remains from the moment of death and for some considerable time after that.

What if (sorry it's graphic) what happened is somewhat like this:

Someone lets the child, who is wearing the black tutu dress sit down on the quilt pretending they're going to play a game. Lets her cover her eyes for a surprise and shoots her from behind (head?). Covers the mess with the smilie t-shirt, wraps her in the quilt and buries her (at the spot). Leaves her there for some years until there is a nescessity to remove the remains from that spot.

That person strolls around at textile containers (do you have those in Australia?) or dumps, picks out some pinky girlie clothes in the right size, the holden shorts and the red & white boys shorts and makes sure that some items are recently sold (maybe even buys them), cause I heard Des Bray mention that some of the items were sold 2 years ago at K-mart.

Finds an old suitcase somewhere, puts all the stuff in there and digs up the remains in the quilt and puts it with the other items in the suitcase . And subsequently puts the suitcase and everything in it in the water at a hidden spot at another location in order to erase as much evidence/DNA as possible.

Until either that person wants closure, the circumstances have changed, like someone involved has died or is dying, or the spot where the suitcase is kept is no longer safe like the hideout being sold.

So the road is finished, road workers left items like the straw hat, a glove etc.
The killer? retrieves the suitcase, takes it to where it will be found and takes the quilt, the remains (and the smilie shirt?) out of the suitcase and hides it at the bush. Collects items from the road workers to distract forensics and leaves those with the remains.

Zips up the suitcase, throws it in a bush at a spot where it will likely be found and voilà.
The rest is 'suitcase history'.

Lots of DNA from innocent people, a massively contaminated crime scene. And DNA that has been both burried and soaked in water for years.

So what I would be looking at to solve this, is the remains, the quilt, black dress and the smilie shirt for the year she most likely died in. Then look for property being sold or landscape changes that would reveal the burreal site around two years ago, when some of the clothing was sold at K mart. Make an apeal to people who got rid of the same Lanza suitcase around two years ago. And find a reason why the remains were left at the road around March (motive).
Click to expand...

Thank you for your theory! :) I have no better - honestly: I have none.

I will do it briefly scrutinizing something:

Tutu, smiley shirt and quilt are more degraded than the other items - yes.

One head shot - no. Police said "the girl appeared to have suffered a violent death"/met a “violent and terrible death”. I think, it has been much more worse than a shot.

Collecting or buying more nice clothing for a girl, only to fill a suitcase and then dumping the case? Why exactly? It wasn't necessary, I think.

No idea, whether clothing remains in the shown condition if put under water for a longer time. I doubt it.

Partly empty the suitcase (tutu, shirt, quilt, remains of the girl) and put the case a few metres away on the same place beside the road - why so laborious? Why not dump the suitcase with the complete content? Why had the perp once more to handle the remains - I think, he didn't like that. What would be the benefit to the perp?

Property - okay.
Lanza suitcase - okay.
Motive because of the time (March) - okay.

What theory about our "neatly dressed" suitcase man? At which point he comes into play?


Maybe, I'm thinking a bit unlogical - that's me. Sometimes I need an extra explanation, sorry. :blushing:
 
FromGermany said:
Thank you for your theory! :) I have no better - honestly: I have none.

I will do it briefly scrutinizing something:

Tutu, smiley shirt and quilt are more degraded than the other items - yes.

One head shot - no. Police said "the girl appeared to have suffered a violent death"/met a “violent and terrible death”. I think, it has been much more worse than a shot.

Shot in the head from behind is pretty terrible and violent I think, but i don't know if that happened.

Collecting or buying more nice clothing for a girl, only to fill a suitcase and then dumping the case? Why exactly? It wasn't necessary, I think.

I tried to find an explanation how she could have died in 2007-2008 while there were also clothes in the suitcase that were sold 2 years ago at K-Mart. And more used clothes from other kids means more different DNA present.

No idea, whether clothing remains in the shown condition if put under water for a longer time. I doubt it.

Partly empty the suitcase (tutu, shirt, quilt, remains of the girl) and put the case a few metres away on the same place beside the road - why so laborious? Why not dump the suitcase with the complete content? Why had the perp once more to handle the remains - I think, he didn't like that. What would be the benefit to the perp?

I don't know. Maybe that person does have a consciousness and didn't want to traumatize whoever opened the suitcase. Or mix the DNA of the remains with random items found alongside the road.

Property - okay.
Lanza suitcase - okay.
Motive because of the time (March) - okay.

What theory about our "neatly dressed" suitcase man? At which point he comes into play?

I'm not sure.

Maybe, I'm thinking a bit unlogical - that's me. Sometimes I need an extra explanation, sorry. :blushing:
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with your thinking :D
Only with my quoting.
 
DutchTreat said:
What if that person did care for the girl. And kept her around for years. But that time is getting short (maybe dying) and wants the girl found and for her to get a proper burial, but does not want to be discovered as being the one that killed her, or 'just' hid the remains for all those years.

But I wouldn't be surprised one bit if this turns out to be a local story after all.

I think someone did care what she was buried in. And killed her in her prettiest dress. And it could very well be that she had to die for some reason according to the killer, but that this person also cared for her and couldn't bring himself (herself?) to change the clothes after she would have died.
Click to expand...


Yes, could be...

Although isn't the side of the highway a strange choice of place? It could have been found by someone who didn't care about her buriel, or not found, or dispersed by wild animals...

Perhaps on your theory the killer put the case in a more accessible place such as on someone's property, and that person then moved it to the highway, not wanting anything to do with it?
 
AtaraMalka said:
Yes, could be...

Although isn't the side of the highway a strange choice of place? It could have been found by someone who didn't care about her buriel, or not found, or dispersed by wild animals...

Perhaps on your theory the killer put the case in a more accessible place such as on someone's property, and that person then moved it to the highway, not wanting anything to do with it?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that could be the case. But my gut feeling says no :D
 
Hi, new here!

For what's worth, I always think of that saying "when you hear hoof beats think horses not zebras". While there are some peculiar aspects of the crime, the most likely scenario is that the child was killed by her parent or primary caregiver. Statistically speaking, this is most likely, as children are more likely to be harmed by a person known to them than a stranger. This is also the most obvious explanation of why the child was never reported missing.

Apparently, there are five types of filicide:

1. “Altruistic” motives – the parent truly believes that the child is better off in heaven, or they believe that the child’s suffering would be unbearable if they have to live.
2. Parent is psychotic/has psychotic break.
3. The “fatal battering” – this is where the parent uses physical abuse to punish what they perceive as bad behaviour and the child dies during a beating or through violent action such as being thrown into a wall.
4. Covering up an unwanted birth (this would generally happen only to newborns, the case of Tegan Lane is an example)
5. Revenge against the ex – such as the murders of Luke Batty and Darcy Freeman. These murders are usually carried out publicly with no effort made to conceal the crime (quite the opposite actually because the point is to maximise the ex’s pain)

This murder probably fits with types 2 and 3, which are physically violent crimes, occurring in an act of rage. Type 1 is usually a death that wouldn’t leave serious physical injury to the skeleton such as crushing up sleeping pills in the child’s milk or driving them into a lake to drown, Type 4 is a crime usually committed right after birth (although rare cases have been found in older children where the mother wanted a new life no strings attached). Type 5 is not concealed by the perpetrator and certainly never unreported to the police by the other parent.

Keisha Abrahams died of a "fatal battering" and there were as many as five or six visible injuries to her jaw -- these injuries were able to be seen on her skeleton over a year after her death and were judged to have occurred immediately prior to death. Perhaps something similar happened to this child.

My feeling (and I could be completely wrong) is that this is an unsophisticated crime. The person who did this is not cunning or a criminal mastermind. They just haven't been caught yet because no one has realised that their child is missing. Leaving the suitcase by the road? Maybe they did want it to be found, maybe they were trying to confuse the police, or maybe they just needed to get rid of it in a hurry and leaving it anywhere was fine as long as it wasn't found in their immediate possession.
 
sunnybree said:
Hi, new here!

For what's worth, I always think of that saying "when you hear hoof beats think horses not zebras". While there are some peculiar aspects of the crime, the most likely scenario is that the child was killed by her parent or primary caregiver. Statistically speaking, this is most likely, as children are more likely to be harmed by a person known to them than a stranger. This is also the most obvious explanation of why the child was never reported missing.

Apparently, there are five types of filicide:

1. “Altruistic” motives – the parent truly believes that the child is better off in heaven, or they believe that the child’s suffering would be unbearable if they have to live.
2. Parent is psychotic/has psychotic break.
3. The “fatal battering” – this is where the parent uses physical abuse to punish what they perceive as bad behaviour and the child dies during a beating or through violent action such as being thrown into a wall.
4. Covering up an unwanted birth (this would generally happen only to newborns, the case of Tegan Lane is an example)
5. Revenge against the ex – such as the murders of Luke Batty and Darcy Freeman. These murders are usually carried out publicly with no effort made to conceal the crime (quite the opposite actually because the point is to maximise the ex’s pain)

This murder probably fits with types 2 and 3, which are physically violent crimes, occurring in an act of rage. Type 1 is usually a death that wouldn’t leave serious physical injury to the skeleton such as crushing up sleeping pills in the child’s milk or driving them into a lake to drown, Type 4 is a crime usually committed right after birth (although rare cases have been found in older children where the mother wanted a new life no strings attached). Type 5 is not concealed by the perpetrator and certainly never unreported to the police by the other parent.

Keisha Abrahams died of a "fatal battering" and there were as many as five or six visible injuries to her jaw -- these injuries were able to be seen on her skeleton over a year after her death and were judged to have occurred immediately prior to death. Perhaps something similar happened to this child.

My feeling (and I could be completely wrong) is that this is an unsophisticated crime. The person who did this is not cunning or a criminal mastermind. They just haven't been caught yet because no one has realised that their child is missing. Leaving the suitcase by the road? Maybe they did want it to be found, maybe they were trying to confuse the police, or maybe they just needed to get rid of it in a hurry and leaving it anywhere was fine as long as it wasn't found in their immediate possession.
Click to expand...

Hi! :seeya:

What about a pedophile ring perhaps?

What does suitcase man in your scenario?

Otherwise I agree with you on your motives 1. - 5.
 
The different degrees of degradation seen in the clothing and quilt could also just be due to some items being cotton or having a higher cotton content than the others. Cotton will rot away more quickly - polyesters and synthetics not so much. Even the fabrics used on the quilt were probably all different - the ones that are not even present any longer may have been all cotton, while the others could have been a blend. The sunflower print for example might have been a thicker polyester blend (or all poly) if it had previously been a tablecloth.
 
sunnybree said:
My feeling (and I could be completely wrong) is that this is an unsophisticated crime. The person who did this is not cunning or a criminal mastermind.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea why it is so hard for the police to get a full DNA profile?
Personally I think that the killing might have been unsophisticated. But that whatever happened to the remains after the girl was killed, might have been very cunning.
 
sunnybree said:
Hi, new here!

For what's worth, I always think of that saying "when you hear hoof beats think horses not zebras". While there are some peculiar aspects of the crime, the most likely scenario is that the child was killed by her parent or primary caregiver. Statistically speaking, this is most likely, as children are more likely to be harmed by a person known to them than a stranger. This is also the most obvious explanation of why the child was never reported missing.

Apparently, there are five types of filicide:

1. “Altruistic” motives – the parent truly believes that the child is better off in heaven, or they believe that the child’s suffering would be unbearable if they have to live.
2. Parent is psychotic/has psychotic break.
3. The “fatal battering” – this is where the parent uses physical abuse to punish what they perceive as bad behaviour and the child dies during a beating or through violent action such as being thrown into a wall.
4. Covering up an unwanted birth (this would generally happen only to newborns, the case of Tegan Lane is an example)
5. Revenge against the ex – such as the murders of Luke Batty and Darcy Freeman. These murders are usually carried out publicly with no effort made to conceal the crime (quite the opposite actually because the point is to maximise the ex’s pain)

This murder probably fits with types 2 and 3, which are physically violent crimes, occurring in an act of rage. Type 1 is usually a death that wouldn’t leave serious physical injury to the skeleton such as crushing up sleeping pills in the child’s milk or driving them into a lake to drown, Type 4 is a crime usually committed right after birth (although rare cases have been found in older children where the mother wanted a new life no strings attached). Type 5 is not concealed by the perpetrator and certainly never unreported to the police by the other parent.

Keisha Abrahams died of a "fatal battering" and there were as many as five or six visible injuries to her jaw -- these injuries were able to be seen on her skeleton over a year after her death and were judged to have occurred immediately prior to death. Perhaps something similar happened to this child.

My feeling (and I could be completely wrong) is that this is an unsophisticated crime. The person who did this is not cunning or a criminal mastermind. They just haven't been caught yet because no one has realised that their child is missing. Leaving the suitcase by the road? Maybe they did want it to be found, maybe they were trying to confuse the police, or maybe they just needed to get rid of it in a hurry and leaving it anywhere was fine as long as it wasn't found in their immediate possession.
Click to expand...

Hello, sunnybree, nice to be 'talking' with you.

I tend to agree with your thinking, and agree that this fits the framework of 2 or 3 best. Unfortunately I think the psychotic element is pretty strong in this case and that the truth lies somewhat closer to 2.

As for the suitcase, I'm stumped!
 
Precisely. The presence of hair indicates that there was no fire.
Also there is no evidence of being stored in water.

The time to process DNA evidence is a minimum of 2 weeks in the real world.
(see http://www.patc.com/weeklyarticles/dna-timeline.shtml)

But also bear in mind that even with a full DNA profile, unless you have some other DNA to compare it to, it is worthless.

Really, DNA will be of no use until the police have a suspect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 189 more.
Total: 1,967 (members: 190, guests: 1,777)

Online statistics

Members online
190
Guests online
1,777
Total visitors
1,967
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,560
Messages
18,096,699
Members
230,879
Latest member
CATCHASE
Back
Top