AUS - Khandalyce Kiara Pearce, Wynarka, Bones of a Child Discovered, July'15 - #6

[debirlfan]

Interestingly Holden SS shorts and the motorsport near track nearby.

If everything was out of the suitcase - are police sure the Holden shorts (and those red ones) came from the suitcase? Could they be random items that just happened to be found in that area? If someone was driving down the road, and their boy needed to use a bush, but didn't quite make it - dirty shorts could be tossed...

 

[Oona]

Is much known about these? Size? Brand? I can't find any like them in a quick google image search.

 

[stillwatersc]

Is much known about these? Size? Brand? I can't find any like them in a quick google image search.

My daughter had similar shorts when she played soccer.

 

[hideoustroll]

My daughter had similar shorts when she played soccer.

Yes, mine too.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Yes, mine too.

Same here. Do they have youth soccer leagues in Australia? (I assume they do, but thought I'd ask) What age do they start?

It's been years but I think my daughter was 6 when she started soccer in the U.S.

 

[Dogface]

LOL Hardly likely .... why waste perfectly good petrol money to drive around Geocaching ...

when you could use that money for drugs!

Yeah I haven't ever known any drug addicts to geocache, too much effort. Plus the app is $10 here. I was thinking more along the lines If suitcase man maintains a cache in the area, perhaps that's why he was out walking in that area. Not likely, but just a thought I had. I was awful at maintaining the cache I had, it's unreal how often they get disturbed(although I live in a very populated area).

 

[hideoustroll]

Same here. Do they have youth soccer leagues in Australia? (I assume they do, but thought I'd ask) What age do they start?

It's been years but I think my daughter was 6 when she started soccer in the U.S.

Yeah, the littlies can play here. They can start the year they turn five in the region I live.

 

[Found]

Yeah, the littlies can play here. They can start the year they turn five in the region I live.

Those shorts are quite common in Kmart etc for pretty cheap in a few colours. Def possible girl clothing but I think too young to join a soccer team. I'd guess an older sibling or hand me down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JaneSA]

That could support the "suitcase stolen from shed" theory.

Yep. I think the phrase "on the periphery of this case" means they are asking the thief to come forward.

 

[AtaraMalka]

I agree with Puggle I am not sure about the Geocaching.

But I do wonder if any particular criminal community may be considered to be on the periphery of this case.

"We encourage everybody in the community, whether it be ordinary members of the community, people within the criminal community, this is a really, really tragic case and we ask everybody to get behind the police."

Always thought it was interesting they got a special mention.
imo

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-17/child-bones-in-sa-unlikely-those-of-william-tyrell/6628908

I don't there's necessarily anything significant in this statement, IMO.

Police talk to criminals for inside information in most investigations, as a matter of course.

So yes, it's interesting that they're giving it a special mention. But this could be mainly because the case is so serious, the duty to co-operate with police far outweighs any personal concerns or fears of prosecution. Police are not interested in petty or peripheral crimes in a situation like this and will overlook them in order to get information, so I think they're just reminding criminals about that.

 

[Froglady]

They have soccajoeys for 3-5 in south australia.

 

[AtaraMalka]

Yep. I think the phrase "on the periphery of this case" means they are asking the thief to come forward.

What thief?

It is right that we are trying to be careful not to jump to conclusions about suitcase man. We can't assume he is connected with the suitcase in which the little girl was found, until we have evidence of that. And we are mindful of the media's power to create myths our minds (such as the idea that suitcase man, because he was 'clean cut,' was wearing a suit).

So why then are we conjecturing about thieves, surveyors, estate agents, geocachers and the like when there is no evidence whatsoever, in relation to our crime, that any such people exist?

 

[JaneSA]

What thief?

It is right that we are trying to be careful not to jump to conclusions about suitcase man. We can't assume he is connected with the suitcase in which the little girl was found, until we have evidence of that. And we are mindful of the media's power to create myths our minds (such as the idea that suitcase man, because he was 'clean cut,' was wearing a suit).

So why then are we conjecturing about thieves, surveyors, estate agents, geocachers and the like when there is no evidence whatsoever, in relation to our crime, that any such people exist?

My theory is that the case was stolen intact from a shed.
I don't believe it was intentionally dumped.

My reasoning is that if someone was going to dump it to destroy evidence it would not have been all together - contents and bones - in one place.

I believe that thieves stole it from somewhere, whether or not they know the contents.
I came to this conclusion almost as soon as I read about the crime.

I find it is the only scenario that fits the known facts.

 

[JaneSA]

I initially based my "stolen from a shed" theory on the numerous reported shed thefts in the Murray Mallee and the warnings from police at the beginning of the year to lock out-buildings securely due to the sharp rise in this criminal activity.
I have a strong reason to believe the police consider this the most likely explanation too, and hence why they refer to people peripheral to the crime and to criminals to come forward.

 

[jessie]

I don't there's necessarily anything significant in this statement, IMO.

Police talk to criminals for inside information in most investigations, as a matter of course.

So yes, it's interesting that they're giving it a special mention. But this could be mainly because the case is so serious, the duty to co-operate with police far outweighs any personal concerns or fears of prosecution. Police are not interested in petty or peripheral crimes in a situation like this and will overlook them in order to get information, so I think they're just reminding criminals about that.

There must be a lot of people who have no wish to get involved with a police investigation for any number of reasons.
Maybe, just maybe, someone who has outstanding warrants or is well known to be part of the criminal fraternity could have suspicions about another or have heard talk, but are scared to give information.
Whoever did this terrible thing to a child is not a nice person. Fear of retaliation from this person or their 'friends' might be very real to them.
If this is the case I only hope they find some sort of conscience and attempt to help the police.

Would the offer of a "reward" for useful information help do you think?

 

[LindyLooUK]

But if someone stole the case & don't want to make themselves known to the police for whatever reasons, they could call the police from a public phone anonymously or get a friend to call them or even send the police a note through the post anonymously with the address of where they stole it from.
Surely even a thief, drug dealer etc wouldn't want a child murderer to get away it!

 

[jessie]

But if someone stole the case & don't want to make themselves known to the police for whatever reasons, they could call the police from a public phone anonymously or get a friend to call them or even send the police a note through the post anonymously with the address of where they stole it from.
Surely even a thief, drug dealer etc wouldn't want a child murderer to get away it!

I'm going on the idea that there is someone (or more than one) person who knows something about what happened to angel originally.
Regarding an informer this is who I was thinking of, not someone involved with stealing and dumping the case.

Someone out there must have their suspicions about how angel was killed, and who did it. This is the person that needs to somehow get in touch with the police.

 

[LindyLooUK]

Sorry Jessie, that reply was meant in regards to previous posts where people think maybe the case was stolen from a shed etc & too afraid to report it.
Yes I agree with your post that someone knows something, lets hope they eventually have a conscience, the sooner the better.

 

[sosocurious]

I'm going on the idea that there is someone (or more than one) person who knows something about what happened to angel originally.
Regarding an informer this is who I was thinking of, not someone involved with stealing and dumping the case.

Someone out there must have their suspicions about how angel was killed, and who did it. This is the person that needs to somehow get in touch with the police.

I agree jessie
Just as you say in my opinion someone(s) that has suspicion, knowledge or maybe even witnessed but was not actually responsible for the killing.

 

[AtaraMalka]

My theory is that the case was stolen intact from a shed.
I don't believe it was intentionally dumped.

My reasoning is that if someone was going to dump it to destroy evidence it would not have been all together - contents and bones - in one place.

I believe that thieves stole it from somewhere, whether or not they know the contents.
I came to this conclusion almost as soon as I read about the crime.

I find it is the only scenario that fits the known facts.

And it's a pefectly reasonable theory. I personally don't have a better one!

I am just trying to illustrate that saying things like 'the thief' and 'the shed' repeatedly is how myths get started. (You can take any example you like; 'thief' and 'shed' are just the words I happened to see today looking at this thread).

If we see these words in print so many times, interspersed amidst factual information, we start to seem them as facts too, and our capacity to separate fact from fiction is reduced.

That's what newspapers are doing all the time - there are already several examples of it in this case.

So it may be your theory, and it may be a good one worthy of exploration, but because of the context, some people will read it as fact.

If we are going to hold the sightings of suitcase man up to very high levels of scrutiny and proof, and take care not to make inferences where pieces of the jigsaw missing (which is the correct thing to do) then the same standard of logic should be applied with regard to other aspects of the case, otherwise things become unbalanced and ultimately we are led off track.