Australia Australia Claremont Serial Killer, 1996 - 1997, Perth, Western Australia - #11

[Sutton]

Oh my goodness Sutton, I apologise for misleading you. If you'd read previous posts, you would see that we were brainstorming on possible scenarios of the CCTV footage.

Note my original post with Tundrawolf's BF post he does describe both BRE & EE in more detail from his wife's perspective.

IMO

Maybe I'm being too touchy. So much misinformation has been started in these last few threads. It's all good, 123.

 

[123sniff]

I agree, all the evidence so far points to power/control motive. Perhaps his view of himself was not reflected by his peers so he decided to take matters into his own hands? Maybe once he had an adoring wife (CGE), a respected job, and a respected role at LA this was enough for him. It was mentioned on BF forum his first wife was domineering, so perhaps the first marriage did not curb his ways, and the deterioration of his marriage led to escalation of his violent behaviour?

Having obsessively scoured the CCTV footage, I was convinced JR willing went with MM. But hearing and seeing the new opinions on VE (vested employee), I've changed my mind. IMHO JR had her sights set on VE, and MM/CSK takes advantage once she's given up & started walking off on her own. My gut feeling is CSK tricks his victims into getting close to his car, and then it's a full-on blitz attack.This also fits with KK's description and various other cases. The only descriptions I've read about BRE is "reserved, quiet, pedantic, controlling" not really the type to charm girls off their feet.

Yes! And MM must have felt quite rejected when she turned her attention back to waiting for VE. MM then heads back up the street, around the corner and waits/watches. Interestingly JR watches him turn the corner, maybe she's making sure he's gone, he gave her the creeps? A fellow poster SKYZA cleverly identified this as MM by his distinctive gait (refer earlier posts in this thread).

Note: MM's legs are visible pacing back & forth at the corner of the street (top of screen) before and after his interaction with JR. I'm convinced these legs belong to MM based on the distinctive gait.

Please note the above comments were made IMO and are in no way proven as fact. I was having a discussion with other members and neglected to add IMO which has been noted as another member as misleading. For that I apologise once again. Slap on the wrist for me!

 

[123sniff]

Maybe I'm being too touchy. So much misinformation has been started in these last few threads. It's all good, 123.

There's misinformation in every thread. Most of us don't have access to vital information, therefore rely on discussion and heresay to work through issues. I'll try and make sure I add "IMO" in future

And I apologise for my overreaction to your overreaction. I had just come from dealing with my teenage daughters who, despite driving me insane at times, are my main motivation for wanting to see predators like the CSK caught and put away for a very, very long time.

 

[rhythymz]

Another focus could be the caveat that was put on 10 Fountain Way in 1995.

A previous poster had speculated that the caveat marked the end of the alleged offender's first marriage. Is that correct? If so, did it also mark a change in behaviour on his part? There was an alleged offence in 1995....was it before or after the caveat?

Are there any reported assaults/attacks for which BRE has not been charged that occurred after the caveat yet before the alleged KK attack?

This caveat information needs to be on the timeline and we need to know....

1) name of lodging party
2) date of lodgement
3) names of signatories

I have not done a search but I have managed to ascertain that the caveat on 10 Fountain Way, Huntingdale was lodged on 6 July 1995.

That was five months after the alleged KK assault on 12 February 1995.

 

[MrsNathanDrake]

But isn't vest guy right there in the same frame as MM?

I think what people might be getting at is that maybe MM/CSK sees what is happening between JR and vest-guy and intercepts.

Whoever got SS got her while she was waiting for a taxi she had called, maybe whoever got JR got her while she was waiting for vest-guy?

 

[Moustachio]

Good grief, everybody's so sensitive about man *advertiser censored* without acknowledging the CSK behaviour linked to steroid abuse of which Western Australia has the highest incidence. Officially, 5.4% over the age of 14 years old to 1996 have used. And that figure is cited as low for obvious reasons. So, it was probably up there at around 9%. It's no huge stretch.

Actually, it is quite a big stretch IMO

 

[tundrawolf]

Sorry I just did a long response to your comments Sutton but somehow my post disappeared again.

My wife described EE as domineering, and when she was describing her physically it was clear that she didn't look like the girls.

She didn't say much about RBE other than he was very quiet, not friendly but not rude either. My wife lived in Belmont at the time and she distinctly recalls that they were living in Madora on this particular night or time that she was given the lift. She mentioned Madora before news about that property being searched came to light, because I have to admit I wasn't overly certain my wife had got it right. She kept on insisting that he was previously married to EE, as at that stage there was no mention of her only CGE. She was so freaked by the photo of him and in attempt to prove to me that it wasn't in her head she texted all her former work colleagues who might remember EE, but none of them did. When EE was eventually mentioned in the media I was on the receiving end of one of the biggest "I ***** told you so" look I have ever seen!

I never verbalized to her that I thought she was mistaken but clearly she can read me like a book!

I never met EE.

 

[AlwaysCurious77]

The doco about psychopaths is called I Psychopath. It is fascinating.

[video=youtube;jKvhKI6Kxew]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKvhKI6Kxew[/video]

 

[Harluna]

That saying I live by comes to mind "Stand up for what you believe even if you are standing alone."
But okay, I don't want to get banned for talking about the 'S' word.

This CSK discussion has died because of people like you. You carried on with your steroid nonsense for page after page, when it's obvious he didn't take them and it's obvious it has no relevance to anything.
This forum has become boring very quickly with the weird mods erasing every second post and starting new threads for some stupid reason.
It's a joke of a forum really, I won't be posting here anymore. A shame because it's an interesting case that can't be talked about here, just stupid people talking about steroids, the type of handbag someone was wearing and who is who in security footage.
Before I get banned does anyone know of a forum that isn't full of idiots, run by idiots, where you can actually talk about things?

 

[ShellyGale]

Actually, it is quite a big stretch IMO

The information is out there but I'm not allowed to talk about it any more and I don't want to get banned.

 

[AlwaysCurious77]

I've been scrutinising the videos to the detriment of all the other things I'm supposed to be doing. I'm not sure if I'm seeing things but in the CIA documentary in one of the CCTV angles it looks like a car is parked near Jane. It is there the whole time but the best image is at 39:25. Curiously it isn't visible from the other angle but there is also nothing shown in the other angle that can account for what is there. I'm really confused? Has a car been removed from the vision?

 

[PrimeSuspect]

But isn't vest guy right there in the same frame as MM?

Yes he is, he's having a smoke and then tries to enter doorway blocked by two other guys, at that moment MM approaches JR. As Sutton has said, CIA interviewed those in the CCTV except the MM. He fits BRE's physical appearance imo.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

:chillpill: :wave:

 

[mandy.maree]

The doco about psychopaths is called I Psychopath. It is fascinating.

[video=youtube;jKvhKI6Kxew]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKvhKI6Kxew[/video]

Thank you very much. I was trying to find it!
Have to check this one out

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

[jubillee]

As it stands there is only DNA evidence and car fibre evidence that could match thousands of other cars, trial by judge with proposal of any reasonable doubt seems a far easier avenue to me.

There is no accountability for the career of a jury member if they make the wrong call, there is for a judge who wrongly improsions someone who is subsequently cleared, which is why they are less likely to find someone guilty if there is even the smallest semebelence of doubt.

oh and welcome aboard, glad to have you here.

Thats only what the police have released. They could have far more than that.

 

[Mazfrank]

I hope my following input won't have me shot down in flames - please be gentle, as I have not previously given my own take on the dynamics of the CCTV outside the claremont, but having studied the CCTV - the body language - over and over, and having since read some posted opinions which lend support to my own interpretation of what I observe,
I will put my theory forward (partly as a possible explanation as to 'how/why' Jane may have naively decided to become separated from her peers.)

Aside from the blitz attack ideation, it has also been spec'd the girls felt at enough ease to go freely with whomever they had accepted a lift due to having some familiarity(?) eg taxi driver, pretend cop, a regular
I am thinking along the lines of a recognised 'claremont hotel regular'
- more specifically an employee - and that is why I asked, earlier, about entrances, exits and carparking which may have only been accessible to staff.



and I agree with artygunner :



The vested man is initially seen smoking, with his foot up on the railing, shortly after midnight. The huge mobile (or walkie) hanging off the back of his strides suggests to me that he is a member of the hotel staff who is having a smoke because 00:00 is his clock-off time.



I spec' JR had backtracked to the Claremont in hopes of hooking up with the vested employee having had earlier occasion(s) for brief exchange - he may have even said if you're still about when i finish work (a) we could go for coffee (b) i'm going to a party with a mate if you'd like to come, we could hook up? (c) i'll give you a lift (d) etc

Regardless, after he finishes smoking, Jane's attention is certainly in his direction as he begins to walk toward the camera - it's ever so subtle, but they are both aware of each other.
In fact, pause the clip, frame by frame and you can see that as he walks towards the door, just before he veers to his left - there's a distinct moment where he and Jane make direct eye contact, at which point I note a slight softening of her face and the beginning of a smile - he notices Jane, but he's aloof and his back is soon towards her while he waits at the doorway to re-enter the hotel
— when suddenly the MM comes into view —
Jane definitely does appear to recognise the MM, but I don't interpret her exaggerated laughter as having much to do with him, as much as I consider it her flirtatious last ditch effort to capture the fleeting vested employee's attention while she is still within his earshot, she wants him to hear her, to let him know that she's still there, available, vivacious, and to be taken notice of ... again too late ... he enters the building, and once inside, i spec he's in a hurry to clock off and he removes his work vest having finished for the night.
By now the MM is also somewhere out of the street cameras' range.
The now unvested employee is next seen peeping from the doorway, perhaps discreetly checking whether Jane is still there, and perhaps also checking for any sign of that mate whom I spec' he may have arranged to meet after work to go partying.
(Consider that MM may have been the vested employee's mate/lift, and that Jane's recognition was simply because she had met him previously as an associate of vested employee, and she was pleased to see MM arrive because it meant her night was about to begin.)

After the now un-vested employee has peeped and pulled his head back indoors, Jane moves forward a few steps. Craning slightly, she glances towards the doorway to see in which direction went that cute member of staff.
Aware that the unvested employee and his MM-mate(?) will soon round the corner to collect her, she checks her watch, and knowing they should only be a minute or two longer, steps out onto the road to see if she can see them coming. ..after which, she vanishes.
That is my take, but Mandy.Maree has also picked up on some of this -


What exactly happened next remains a mystery.
Like everyone, I speculate with whom Jane spent her final moments.
I am keeping an open mind, however based on my theory, of the MM it would be interesting if any possible link could be established between BRE and the vested employee.
I also consider the possibility that whoever did drive Jane away from the Claremont that night 'may not necessarily' have been the person responsible for her death (although I concede, it does seem most probable)


[emoji887]

Sooo good.... a brilliant take on things... and let's face it, every young girl who's been a regular at a club... bar tenders flirt with patrons to get them to come back and bring friends. I also think JR was definitely waiting for 'someone' out the front... she did seem excited (whilst trying to remain cool), flirty and fun (but not to eager)... just my opinion.... she may have harmlessly left with the vested male and something also could have put her off of him. I know myself, back in the days of playing in bands etc. we'd often be invited back to parties - being the square I was, when ever drugs were offered (pretty much always), I'd get scared and make some excuses that I had to go home. Supposing JR was in a car with the vested man and he decided to toke up on his way home.. she may have said something like - oh um, I just remembered I have to get home and asked to be dropped off... which could have happened. The toking driver really wouldn't have wanted to wreck his buzz and may have oblige. Meaning JR was sort of stuck somewhere and unwittingly accepted a lift from BRE rather than be alone when there was a killer on the loose. She may have known him or just that he has a branded car felt it safer. When I was younger (around that time - and driving all over Perth to gigs), I got lost in Perth and the person I flagged over to help me was a Aussie post driver. Being he was in a branded van I felt I was somewhat safe. I got in his car and looked at his road map book, not knowing who he was, but I felt I was a bit desperate and needed help. I'm just glad it wasn't BRE's branded car.

My point is at that time girls were scared.... and often because of a persons look, attitude, what they drove, uniforms... we felt that we were safer asking for help from them - because they didn't look like a killer.... in our minds, what BRE looks like, wasn't someone I would expect.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[troumye]

On another tangent, did anyone else picked up on the post from "BenJones84" ( thread #5 post 396) with pictures. When I heard that the Commodore station wagon had been seized, it made me wonder if it was the same one.The pictures of the inside of the back part of the wagon does appear discoloured and the mat does not appear to lay flat flush with the base(as if it has been water-affected; eg washed) IMO.

Secondy, I think it is also in thread 5, a poster makes reference to MM lacking a jawline. Another obvious physical feature that BE is also lacking

 

[Mazfrank]

Honestly, insults do more to ruin this forum than having to skim over posts that you feel are rehashing old material.

If you want to find a different discussion on CSK then google it. We wouldn't know, would we, because we're here?

Hopefully you won't be, by the time I get back

Well 'Harluna' opinion was helpful.... said no one ever. Why can't people just share an opinion, maybe an angle we haven't thought about, rather than criticise a forum they clearly 'registered' to comment in. Grrrrr [emoji30]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[lampformypath]

The doco about psychopaths is called I Psychopath. It is fascinating.

[video=youtube;jKvhKI6Kxew]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKvhKI6Kxew[/video]

Yes, thank you AlwaysCurious77 appreciate effort to find this. Thought the "psycho guy" was thoroughly enjoying all the attention, naturally as a narcissist would do, and he was extremely intelligent and articulate, but I wonder if a true psychopath can self-diagnose as he has? He isn't violent and has never physically harmed anyone. I did only watch 1 episode but was turned off by his apathetic kind of attitude. All seemed a bit self-indulgent, as you'd expect from a person in love with himself. Cheers and thanks for sharing.

 

[Moustachio]

I definitely think he is
And if they do have more footage I think it was a huge mistake not releasing it a lot sooner

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

It's easy to see things when you want to. But think about it - would you really abduct someone a few minutes after you were talking to them right underneath cctv camera? No, I don't think you would.