AUS - Khandalyce Kiara Pearce, Wynarka, Bones of a Child Discovered, July'15 - #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm starting to think the clothes never belonged to the little girl in the first place, but merely put there as a red herring, to lead the police in the wrong direction.
Have the police stated the size of the clothing?
Its been stated that the clothes were placed with the bones into the case at a later date, after decomposition.
So could it be that the clothes were brought from a charity shop or jumble sale, at a later date & put inside the case with the bones, purely to lead the investigation into the wrong direction?
Are the police only estimating the time of death, because of when the clothes were manufactured?
If so she could have died a long, long time ago, sat for years in someones property, before the perpetrator actually purchased the clothes.
Why would the killer keep her body & clothes separate for years and then put them together into the case?
I think the killer burnt her own clothes, shortly after the murder, but I hope I'm wrong!
 
Without wanting to discredit the ladies that claim to have seen suitcase man, one of the first things that came to my mind was that it seemed like they were describing him as someone with a loose likeness to Bill Spedding ? It obviously couldn't of been him but maybe it was said for a reason to sensationalise case , as I know many thought remains in the early days may have belonged to William. Hope that makes sense and really don't want to make them look bad but it was one of my very first instincts.
 
LindyLooUK said:
I'm starting to think the clothes never belonged to the little girl in the first place, but merely put there as a red herring, to lead the police in the wrong direction.
Have the police stated the size of the clothing?
Its been stated that the clothes were placed with the bones into the case at a later date, after decomposition.
So could it be that the clothes were brought from a charity shop or jumble sale, at a later date & put inside the case with the bones, purely to lead the investigation into the wrong direction?
Are the police only estimating the time of death, because of when the clothes were manufactured?
If so she could have died a long, long time ago, sat for years in someones property, before the perpetrator actually purchased the clothes.
Why would the killer keep her body & clothes separate for years and then put them together into the case?
I think the killer burnt her own clothes, shortly after the murder, but I hope I'm wrong!
Click to expand...

the clothes may not have all been the little girls but police have stated clothing manufactured in 2007 was with her body when it decomposed
 
Hbayne said:
Without wanting to discredit the ladies that claim to have seen suitcase man, one of the first things that came to my mind was that it seemed like they were describing him as someone with a loose likeness to Bill Spedding ? It obviously couldn't of been him but maybe it was said for a reason to sensationalise case , as I know many thought remains in the early days may have belonged to William. Hope that makes sense and really don't want to make them look bad but it was one of my very first instincts.
Click to expand...


it could have been bs, (i checked the dates when this was first reported) but probably unlikely
 
Oh thanks BearBear, I didn't know that.
That's good news then, as it gives a more definite time to the death & possible DNA.
I'm leaning towards an illegal immigrants child, why else would this poor little girl not be on any register.
Maybe the mother is fully aware of the investigation, but in a position where she can't come forward.
So sad, poor little baby, some adults are pure evil.
 
I would like to know how it's been decided that the man seen on the two dates 13 April and 26 May was the same man. We haven't heard anything really distinctive about him. Did any of the witnesses see him both days and affirm that he was the same person?
 
I think maybe one or two of the accounts from witnesses regarding suitcase man might be bogus but it seems really unlikely they all were. It's still possible he was there for completely un-illegal reasons though. As to why he hasn't come forward, maybe he does have something to hide but that doesn't necessarily mean he dumped the body. He could be playing up with somebody from the area or something like that and really doesn't want that info to come out. I'm kinda 50/50 on him being involved at the moment, we just don't have the evidence to judge yet.
 
Yes obviously unlikely since developments that it was a little girl, but I just had thoughts - getting on the bandwagon ect. If this man exists he hasn't come forward for a reason, I'm sought of wondering if he ever existed hence my comment in regards to sensationalising case and jumping on bandwagon. Funnily enough I have seen a women walking everyday where I live recently with a suitcase, it does standout compared to the other walkers I see everyday but I guessed she is delivering junk mail
 
LindyLooUK
Registered User
Join Date
Aug 2015
Posts
6
Oh thanks BearBear, I didn't know that.
That's good news then, as it gives a more definite time to the death & possible DNA.
I'm leaning towards an illegal immigrants child, why else would this poor little girl not be on any register.
Maybe the mother is fully aware of the investigation, but in a position where she can't come forward.
So sad, poor little baby, some adults are pure evil.
Click to expand...

I think in the last few days the investigators have said that they are currently crossmatching info from databases in an effort to find any children who dropped off the radar with no explanation, so she may be registered, they just haven't found her yet.
 
hideoustroll said:
I think maybe one or two of the accounts from witnesses regarding suitcase man might be bogus but it seems really unlikely they all were. It's still possible he was there for completely un-illegal reasons though. As to why he hasn't come forward, maybe he does have something to hide but that doesn't necessarily mean he dumped the body. He could be playing up with somebody from the area or something like that and really doesn't want that info to come out. I'm kinda 50/50 on him being involved at the moment, we just don't have the evidence to judge yet.
Click to expand...

Just a completely out there piece of speculation jumping off of this post - the population of the town is tiny, is it at all possible that there was never a "suitcase man" and the town is working together to protect someone? This could explain the differing accounts and the lack of consistency? Probably completely off base but just popped into my mind.
 
Social Networks

Regarding Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and other social networking or blog websites: Links may be used to direct posters to view something on a social networking page. But postings on social networking sites are not considered fact; they are rumour. Copying and pasting, or taking screen caps, directly from these pages is not allowed. (Exception: If the Twitter or Facebook post belongs to a verified news station, it may be copied. But a link should still be provided.)

Also, social networking pages may only be linked if they are directly related to a case, i.e. the victim or suspect. We don't want to post to someone's mother, brother, employer, milkman, or postal carrier just because they know the main player. We also NEVER link to minor's pages (unless they are the victim). And be sure that the page actually belongs to the person being discussed. Do not link to someone if you are not 100% sure it is the correct person. And if a social networking is set to private and you get in the back way, you may not post what you find. Private means private!
 
followtheleader said:
Just a completely out there piece of speculation jumping off of this post - the population of the town is tiny, is it at all possible that there was never a "suitcase man" and the town is working together to protect someone? This could explain the differing accounts and the lack of consistency? Probably completely off base but just popped into my mind.
Click to expand...

Well, that would certainly add an extra layer of horrifying.
 
Hbayne said:
Yes obviously unlikely since developments that it was a little girl, but I just had thoughts - getting on the bandwagon ect. If this man exists he hasn't come forward for a reason, I'm sought of wondering if he ever existed hence my comment in regards to sensationalising case and jumping on bandwagon. Funnily enough I have seen a women walking everyday where I live recently with a suitcase, it does standout compared to the other walkers I see everyday but I guessed she is delivering junk mail
Click to expand...

Maybe old mate with the suitcase was delivering junk mail too, and he was finished and heading off when he past the ladies. :thinking:
 
JaneSA said:
The women who say they saw the man must all be kicking themselves now and wishing they had behaved normally, said "Hi", introduced themselves, asked him if he needed any help, a drink, a ride or directions, instead of scuttling inside to peek at him through the curtains.
Since when did country women become so paranoid?
Click to expand...

Ice has changed country towns.
 
debirlfan said:
Was there some statement or indication somewhere that she was wearing the tutu when she died? I'm curious where that theory came from?
Click to expand...

It's an assumption that has illegitimately gained strength by being picked up and repeated by a number of people throughout our discussions here. In fact there has been no confirmation at all that she was wearing the tutu and nothing at all to indicate that this is the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 203 more.
Total: 1,721 (members: 204, guests: 1,517)

Online statistics

Members online
204
Guests online
1,517
Total visitors
1,721
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,814
Messages
18,099,891
Members
230,932
Latest member
Marni
Back
Top