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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
With the amount of crime shows on tv these days I would have thought anyone trying to dispose of human remains or similar would either turn their phone off/battery out or not take their phone with them...

Yes you would think so ....yet the manner in which the remains were dumped along an arterial hwy indicates a low level of sophistication on behalf of this individual.

Having the forethought to turn off a phone, take the battery out etc... would indicate an organised criminal attempting at all cost to avoid being identified.

If that were the case in this instance he wouldn't be walking along the hwy in the first instance where there is every possibility of him being seen (Which is what has happened) .... the disposal site would also be very different in my opinion.
 
Hi, my first post, though I've been reading now for a while, and it's a simple query... Do the dates of the sighting of the man with suitcase fit with the times those random people saw the suitcase on the roadside? Do the dates make it likely they are totally different cases? Does anyone know the dates the first passers by noticed it there in the tree? Sorry if I'm asking something which is obvious to everyone else!
 
That's true, Puggle. The sightings 44 days apart (April 13 and May 26) means either 2 different men with suitcases or the same man.

Would there be a local farm hiring workers or pickers that would walk a distance with a suitcase.
Sometimes we see people walking in the middle of nowhere here in the blue mountains carrying their life in a suitcase seeking work.

Often you'll see a person walking towards the railway carrying a suitcase leaving the gaol close by.

Did he pick it up from the postoffice that morning....
Just thinking.
 
I wish we could get some more pics of the quilt, perhaps clear close-ups of each patch, or at least some. It'd be good to figure out more patches in the hope that it may make the quilt more identifiable to it's maker. I'd especially like close-ups of the 3rd patch (fox, dingo?):
whatisit.jpg

And the patch on the left hand side of the stars (rockets?):
rockets.png

Also, this is the last patch, it looks like a fairy to me? I am probably wrong though, police say it's dragonflies/butterflies so I'd say they're right.
fairies.jpg quilt.jpg
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/photos-fnlmw1po-1227455382918?page=21
 
Ok I am really not good at enhancing pictures. Not sure if I made a difference or made the pictures worse .

uploadfromtaptalk1438957546669.jpeg

Original

The rest are enhanced.

uploadfromtaptalk1438957641893.jpguploadfromtaptalk1438957653482.jpg
65224d33f87b7b3cc462456a935b8546.jpg


Sent from my SM-T230NU using Tapatalk
 
I must say that for the moment the sightings of suitcase man really remind me of so-called 'Tannerman' ( a man spotted by a witness named Jane Tanner) in the Madeleine McCann Case. It's a cautionary tale!

In that case, a man was seen walking away from the car park of the property where Madeleine was staying, at roughly the same time that Madeleine was figured to have gone missing, carrying in his arms a young child in pink pyjamas who was of of Madeleine's age and size.

For several years after that sighting in May 2007, everyone discussed endlessly the mysterious Tannerman: who he could be and why, if he was innocent, he wasn't coming forward to eliminate myself. Identikits of the man were distributed around the world, and millions of pounds were spent by different police forces and private detective agencies working on the premise that he was a suspect.

At the end of 2013, Scotland Yard, who had recently taken over the case, announced that they had tracked down the man in question and ruled him out as a completely innocent passer-by. (The detailed description of the man and child given by the witness had enabled SY to match him with another innocent parent who was collecting his child from a night crèche nearby.)

None of the many enquiries and mammoth efforts made regarding this suspect had helped police gain more information in the case, or to narrow anything down - the whole thing was just a complete red herring and an enormous waste of time.

So, much as I find suitcase man's movements slightly odd, I am mindful of the fact that we can fixate on a person for want of more information and assume that because that's all we have, it must somehow fit in. Even in the McCann case where there was a great deal to suggest that the man was involved - the exact proximity to the crime scene, the timing, the fact that he was carrying a little girl ! - it turned out to be a complete coincidence.

The man definitely existed; he was not a figment of the imagination of the witness. In fact, Scotland Yard produced a photograph of the person they tracked down, and the physical characteristics of the man and the clothes he was wearing were an incredible match with the details the witness had given. Were it not for her details and accuracy, perhaps SY would not have been so sure in ruling the man out.

So so even when there is a lot more to go on than we have here - and the information we have on suitcase man is pretty scant - we have to exercise caution.
 
I must say that for the moment the sightings of suitcase man really remind me of so-called 'Tannerman' ( a man spotted by a witness named Jane Tanner) in the Madeleine McCann Case. It's a cautionary tale!

In that case, a man was seen walking away from the car park of the property where Madeleine was staying, at roughly the same time that Madeleine was figured to have gone missing, carrying in his arms a young child in pink pyjamas who was of of Madeleine's age and size.

For several years after that sighting in May 2007, everyone discussed endlessly the mysterious Tannerman: who he could be and why, if he was innocent, he wasn't coming forward to eliminate myself. Identikits of the man were distributed around the world, and millions of pounds were spent by different police forces and private detective agencies working on the premise that he was a suspect.

At the end of 2013, Scotland Yard, who had recently taken over the case, announced that they had tracked down the man in question and ruled him out as a completely innocent passer-by. (The detailed description of the man and child given by the witness had enabled SY to match him with another innocent parent who was collecting his child from a night crèche nearby.)

None of the many enquiries and mammoth efforts made regarding this suspect had helped police gain more information in the case, or to narrow anything down - the whole thing was just a complete red herring and an enormous waste of time.

So, much as I find suitcase man's movements slightly odd, I am mindful of the fact that we can fixate on a person for want of more information and assume that because that's all we have, it must somehow fit in. Even in the McCann case where there was a great deal to suggest that the man was involved - the exact proximity to the crime scene, the timing, the fact that he was carrying a little girl ! - it turned out to be a complete coincidence.

The man definitely existed; he was not a figment of the imagination of the witness. In fact, Scotland Yard produced a photograph of the person they tracked down, and the physical characteristics of the man and the clothes he was wearing were an incredible match with the details the witness had given. Were it not for her details and accuracy, perhaps SY would not have been so sure in ruling the man out.

So so even when there is a lot more to go on than we have here - and the information we have on suitcase man is pretty scant - we have to exercise caution.

BBM.
Sorry to continue off-topic, but: Yes, Scotland Yard did curiously 'find' the guy who we all referred to as Tannerman. However the (Scotland Yard) fact that this guy was returning FROM the crèche with his sleepy child, yet was walking TOWARDS the crèche (to the right according to Jane Tanner's details), seems to have conveniently been glossed over. He, could not have been walking FROM the night crèche if Jane Tanner DID see him, unless he was doubling back on himself, (and SY did not say that).

Even curiouser, the guy's name did not become known and he didn't speak to the press to tell his tale. It was like he didn't exist....like ever! I have no links, just 8+ years following that case, so all my own opinion.

Edited to embolden second bit, and add:
I suggest you read her statements and descriptions again - IMO, they evolved. Also, the guy who SY 'found' was then photographed with fuzzed out face, wearing the same clothing he wore that night - that he had kept for 6 years since that night. Hmmmm.... He was also facing the same way as Tanner said...but that was the wrong direction if he was leaving the crèche! Jmo.
 
I must say that for the moment the sightings of suitcase man really remind me of so-called 'Tannerman' ( a man spotted by a witness named Jane Tanner) in the Madeleine McCann Case. It's a cautionary tale!

In that case, a man was seen walking away from the car park of the property where Madeleine was staying, at roughly the same time that Madeleine was figured to have gone missing, carrying in his arms a young child in pink pyjamas who was of of Madeleine's age and size.

For several years after that sighting in May 2007, everyone discussed endlessly the mysterious Tannerman: who he could be and why, if he was innocent, he wasn't coming forward to eliminate myself. Identikits of the man were distributed around the world, and millions of pounds were spent by different police forces and private detective agencies working on the premise that he was a suspect.

At the end of 2013, Scotland Yard, who had recently taken over the case, announced that they had tracked down the man in question and ruled him out as a completely innocent passer-by. (The detailed description of the man and child given by the witness had enabled SY to match him with another innocent parent who was collecting his child from a night crèche nearby.)

None of the many enquiries and mammoth efforts made regarding this suspect had helped police gain more information in the case, or to narrow anything down - the whole thing was just a complete red herring and an enormous waste of time.

So, much as I find suitcase man's movements slightly odd, I am mindful of the fact that we can fixate on a person for want of more information and assume that because that's all we have, it must somehow fit in. Even in the McCann case where there was a great deal to suggest that the man was involved - the exact proximity to the crime scene, the timing, the fact that he was carrying a little girl ! - it turned out to be a complete coincidence.

The man definitely existed; he was not a figment of the imagination of the witness. In fact, Scotland Yard produced a photograph of the person they tracked down, and the physical characteristics of the man and the clothes he was wearing were an incredible match with the details the witness had given. Were it not for her details and accuracy, perhaps SY would not have been so sure in ruling the man out.

So so even when there is a lot more to go on than we have here - and the information we have on suitcase man is pretty scant - we have to exercise caution.

I agree with you 100%. The more I read about the elusive "suitcase man" the more I am convinced he has nothing to do with the case. Just like the gray car in the Daniel Morcombe case. I think the quilt and the tutu are the more interesting clues and may hold some answers we all are overlooking. I am going to concentrate on those items.
 
BBM.
Sorry to continue off-topic, but: Yes, Scotland Yard did curiously 'find' the guy who we all referred to as Tannerman. However the (Scotland Yard) fact that this guy was returning FROM the crèche with his sleepy child, yet was walking TOWARDS the crèche (to the right according to Jane Tanner's details), seems to have conveniently been glossed over. He, could not have been walking FROM the night crèche if Jane Tanner DID see him, unless he was doubling back on himself, (and SY did not say that).

Even curiouser, the guy's name did not become known and he didn't speak to the press to tell his tale. It was like he didn't exist....like ever! I have no links, just 8+ years following that case, so all my own opinion.

Edited to embolden second bit, and add:
I suggest you read her statements and descriptions again - IMO, they evolved. Also, the guy who SY 'found' was then photographed with fuzzed out face, wearing the same clothing he wore that night - that he had kept for 6 years since that night. Hmmmm.... He was also facing the same way as Tanner said...but that was the wrong direction if he was leaving the crèche! Jmo.

Indeed, jygzy, there are a lot of unanswered questions regarding that whole episode. I used to be a moderator on a site focusing on the McCann case so I know exactly what you're talking about!

However I didn't want to wander too much into McCann territory - dangerous waters there! - and my purpose wasn't to compare the two cases, which are certainly very different. I just wanted to make the general point that, whatever case we are talking about, the information we have in front of us, no matter how helpful it appears, can be deceptive.

Personally I still find it odd that suitcase man is being so tight-lipped, given the public duty here to come forward, and the extent to which modern technology could assist him in proving his innocent reasons for being in Wynarka, but I try to remind myself to be rational and that he could easily be entirely innocent and have completely valid reasons for not coming forward.
 
I agree with you 100%. The more I read about the elusive "suitcase man" the more I am convinced he has nothing to do with the case. Just like the gray car in the Daniel Morcombe case. I think the quilt and the tutu are the more interesting clues and may hold some answers we all are overlooking. I am going to concentrate on those items.

Yes, let's hope there is some progress with the quilt and dress. As least, if police are correct, they are directly associated with the child.
 
I think she is referring to domestic violence....DV????
 
yes they said from cotton on ....there is a store in Murray bridge
 
most of the stores that stock the clothes material etc are in mount barker or murray bridge...I knew a lady in murray bridge who always went to spotlight in mount barker for sewing stuff
 
I'm only doubtful about a whole skull fitting in the 10cm thickness.

I found that the average circumference of a 2-3 yearold's head is 46-50cm; using an online conversion calculator, I found that if the head was perfectly circular, the diameter of the head would be 14-15cm. Generally though, our heads are not perfectly round. Some are more oblong and so may have been able to fit whole.. though there is the matter of skull plate fusing that has been mentioned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
211
Guests online
1,882
Total visitors
2,093

Forum statistics

Threads
599,521
Messages
18,096,073
Members
230,869
Latest member
tattvaspa895
Back
Top