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

[CP345]

Sorry waddya mean cobber ?

.

Hahahahaha, classic. Was thinking along the same lines. MO in its full form the point of confusion I'm assuming.

 

[RETPI]

When you are not on the title of a property such as the matrimonial home you may consider lodging a caveat to protect your share of the property.

A caveat is a legal warning or notice that can be put on the title to someone’s land telling anyone interested in buying or lending on that property that you are claiming a share of it. This is done to prevent the property being sold without you getting paid out your share.

http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/1836/divorce-and-property-rights.aspx

BRE's wife might not have been on the title deed or she didn't trust that he'd sell it and disappear with the money.

She was on the title.

 

[Haydos]

On the topic of judge only vs jury trials. I spoke to a lawyer involved in criminal law in WA. While they had no specific inside knowledge of this case, they mentioned that in general it is the policy of the DPP to push for jury trials wherever possible. It makes sense. Our legal system is one in which we are judged by a group of peers. So it seems we will only get a judge only trial if the defendant's legal team requests it. Then it will come down to whether or not the judge believes a jury will be able to give BRE a fair trial.

On that note, it is worth noting the lack of media coverage that currently exists on this case. There has been very little reported in the media since the arrest of BRE. Considering the notoriety of the case I think this must be at the request of WAPOL.

Sure, there has been lots of speculation previously over the years, but none of that has been about BRE. In fact, the existence of that prior speculation (LW et al.) is actually likely to help BRE and be the basis of his defence.

My lawyer friend also suggested that if they were working for the defence, the defence of BRE they would present, would essentially be a prosecution of all the other suspects in the case (LW et al.). In other words, present all the information that WAPOL collected on LW. If the jury is even slightly convinced that it is plausible that LW or any other suspect did the crime, it would be difficult to convince BRE beyond reasonable doubt. In that situation, WAPOL and the DPP will be hoping like hell that the DNA evidence they present is incontrovertible.

 

[rhythymz]

Hahahahaha, classic. Was thinking along the same lines. MO in its full form the point of confusion I'm assuming.

Yes, and its latin, not greek.

 

[RETPI]

Was the caveat lifted on the sale of the property or earlier?

On the sale.

They only made $10,500 over the original price, which suggests the loan wasn't for home improvements or wasn't used for them.

When you consider costs, they did poorly.

 

[petedavo.au]

Try the Nannup doomsday cult family disappearance. I'll send you a link if you can't find it and are interested in doing some actual sleuthing as there's a very good chance that the POI has online traces using an assumed identity somewhere as it's part of his MO

Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=322194

Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

 

[RETPI]

A friend of Mr Edwards said he was close to his parents and regularly went crabbing with his father in the Mandurah area.

One man who has known the 48-year-old since the early 1990s struggled to take in the allegations.

“He is always very quiet ... but he is quite friendly,” the man, who did not want to be named, said. “He never tells anyone anything about anything that he’s doing.”

Another said: “For those of us who do know him, everyone is just stunned and shocked and that is all we can say”.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...e/news-story/23a0b68aefc77eca7f655a46994149dc

Ok, just found this article, posters asking about BRE's friends. Seems the consensus is BRE would be voted least likely to be a serial killer.
I watched news when it first broke and this blond guy (friend of BRE) was genuinely dumbfounded that BRE could be CSK. BRE definitely has a mask he wears because no one has come forward with a story about violent rages or dubious stories etc. Not yet anyway.

Captain David CALDWELL (Special Agent, Forensic Science Services, South Carolina a CSK consultant) is alleged to have said,

“When this bloke is caught, he says grimly, people will be absolutely astounded at who it is.

They are going to say, “I worked with this guy! He’s my next-door neighbour! It can’t be!”.

Source: The Devil’s Garden. The Claremont Serial Killings. Author Debi Marshall, 2007. Chapter 29. Page 103.

 

[GreenE]

On the topic of judge only vs jury trials. I spoke to a lawyer involved in criminal law in WA. While they had no specific inside knowledge of this case, they mentioned that in general it is the policy of the DPP to push for jury trials wherever possible. It makes sense. Our legal system is one in which we are judged by a group of peers. So it seems we will only get a judge only trial if the defendant's legal team requests it. Then it will come down to whether or not the judge believes a jury will be able to give BRE a fair trial.

On that note, it is worth noting the lack of media coverage that currently exists on this case. There has been very little reported in the media since the arrest of BRE. Considering the notoriety of the case I think this must be at the request of WAPOL.

Sure, there has been lots of speculation previously over the years, but none of that has been about BRE. In fact, the existence of that prior speculation (LW et al.) is actually likely to help BRE and be the basis of his defence.

My lawyer friend also suggested that if they were working for the defence, the defence of BRE they would present, would essentially be a prosecution of all the other suspects in the case (LW et al.). In other words, present all the information that WAPOL collected on LW. If the jury is even slightly convinced that it is plausible that LW or any other suspect did the crime, it would be difficult to convince BRE beyond reasonable doubt. In that situation, WAPOL and the DPP will be hoping like hell that the DNA evidence they present is incontrovertible.

I think you're right on the money there! There's def been a mooted response in the media, eerily so.

 

[meticulously]

Hahahahaha, classic. Was thinking along the same lines. MO in its full form the point of confusion I'm assuming.

No worries cp3 thanks . To elaborate , Ive noticed that MO mistakenly , is being taken for "my opinion" too often by recent posters . so to make it clear MO means modus operandi .
TIA

.

 

[ShellyGale]

That makes sense, defence will offer the alternatives up as the murderer and they only need to create a reasonable doubt, knock out some of the DNA as evidence. Wow. Suddenly a conviction of BRE looks not so assured.

snip ... My lawyer friend also suggested that if they were working for the defence, the defence of BRE they would present, would essentially be a prosecution of all the other suspects in the case (LW et al.). In other words, present all the information that WAPOL collected on LW. If the jury is even slightly convinced that it is plausible that LW or any other suspect did the crime, it would be difficult to convince BRE beyond reasonable doubt. In that situation, WAPOL and the DPP will be hoping like hell that the DNA evidence they present is incontrovertible.

 

[petedavo.au]

WA Police doesn't even seem to have any leaks, nothing seems to have filtered out. They're better at keeping things under wraps I think than any of the other states. A friend of mine works for the media in WA, he was there after Ciara Glennon was found. He's pretty good at getting information but he got absolutely nothing. Not a squeak.

Wish the old Daily News was in trove through the 70's and 80's so I can show you. Can't remember the name of the police reporter who was always writing stories about investigations quoting "deep throat". Some were hilarious, even salacious. A couple led to an inquiry or two I believe. They prosecuted and jailed copper for leaking to the skinhead mob that shot up the Queens Park mosque that their phone was bugged. I doubt if there was ever a leak to a journalist since.


Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

 

[BReVeTTe]

Yes, I see Bailey as relevant also. My sense is that KK victim was released because the 'hood' prevented ID. The other 2 however were not so lucky because whatever the MO, they had to have seen him to hop into the car. Raped, then killed to obviate ID. Not necessarily a 'sadistic' killer, just a rapist wanting to avoid detection.

false analogy - just a rapist who is prepared to sadistically kill to avoid detection = a sadistic killer
imho



[emoji887]

 

[RETPI]

Sure, there has been lots of speculation previously over the years, but none of that has been about BRE. In fact, the existence of that prior speculation (LW et al.) is actually likely to help BRE and be the basis of his defence.

My lawyer friend also suggested that if they were working for the defence, the defence of BRE they would present, would essentially be a prosecution of all the other suspects in the case (LW et al.). In other words, present all the information that WAPOL collected on LW. If the jury is even slightly convinced that it is plausible that LW or any other suspect did the crime, it would be difficult to convince BRE beyond reasonable doubt. In that situation, WAPOL and the DPP will be hoping like hell that the DNA evidence they present is incontrovertible.[/QUOTE]

It would be ironic if some of the former heads of Macro were called to give evidence in BRE's defence.

The prosecution would be in a position to force them to admit in a court of law that they were wrong about their other subjects.

 

[jessicalouise]

Captain David CALDWELL (Special Agent, Forensic Science Services, South Carolina a CSK consultant) is alleged to have said,

“When this bloke is caught, he says grimly, people will be absolutely astounded at who it is.

They are going to say, “I worked with this guy! He’s my next-door neighbour! It can’t be!”.

Source: The Devil’s Garden. The Claremont Serial Killings. Author Debi Marshall, 2007. Chapter 29. Page 103.

This is definitely something that has stuck in my mind ever since i first read it.

I really dont see what's surprising about someone who has alluded the police for so long being someone people wouldnt expect. I feel like whenever these things are reported to media it goes one of two ways. They suspected something was up with their neighbour or they never suspected.

 

[meticulously]

I think you're right on the money there! There's def been a mooted response in the media, eerily so.

Normal procedure imo .
Been too many issues recently with these high profile cases due to SM & msn news . There will be sfa info and the primest resource is websleuths.
:Enjoy


.

 

[Grok]

An updated timeline

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Media-Timelines-Photos-*NO-DISCUSSION*/page9

 

[Grok]

She was on the title.

So would it be an action that finished a relationship or sign of en ended relationship ?

 

[CuriousChum]

Sorry a bit of a long one
I just want to add something about the theory he knew the victims.
Picture it> Sorry you have to pretend you're a sick minded killer for a tick>

You're a rapist, having recently blitzed a girl you don't know in a park, taken her in your work van to a cemetery and raped her. You're happy you got away with but are afraid you will get caught if you do it the same way again. Next time you'll be more careful cos you know the victim can give something away. You're nervous but think you can come up with a better plan.

[start murderous period]

You've already killed SS in some way (for now we'll focus on JR).

So this next time you're going to try to catch up with a girl you know ~~~because that is the best way to avoid police questioning when committing a rape or worse (sarcastic tone)~~~. You're going to go late at night, somehow arrange for her to meet at a busyish club/bar, where lots of people can see you. You have to convince her to ditch her friends, get in your car (by her own choice preferably), then while she's a passenger somehow restrain, rape her and murder her. All the while avoiding all possibilities that anyone should recognise you or that she doesn't choose to go with you.

Not to mention, if you'd arranged the meet-up beforehand (before mobiles), you would want to be sure it was totally secret. You definitely would want to be certain she hasn't told a friend and also it'd be a shame if she doesn't show.

I could add many more reasons this scenario seems highly unlikely but for now I'll finish by pointing out, KK was a blitz from a park away from the main strip. It worked but the girl lived to tell the tale, which would've made him nervous. I'm with the idea either he asked them to get in or, IMO more likely, blitzed them when no one could see. MM may have just been an overseas student or something who has never heard about the footage. Or he could've just cracked a funny joke as he walked towards her while asking for a smoke. I just don't see the friendship attack as fitting into the logical progression of the rapes & murders. I hold strongly that on the nights of the murders, if he were to see someone he knew, it'd set his nerves into overdrive and he'd have avoided them like the plague!

Whilst time will tell about MM....IMO his sole aim for approaching JR was to lure her into thebdarkness from which he came and then returned to. This theory was discussed at length over the last few days.

I asked the question with no reply. Could someone tell me if Conti Hotel staff could exit from rear through a staff door to their cars?

 

[CP345]

So would it be an action that finished a relationship or sign of en ended relationship ?

I think it could be and if it was potentially a while after the end of the relationship. Perhaps a loan taken out against the property to pay one party out after a settlement agreement has been reached. If it was for this reason it could be well and truly after the marriage actually ended. Many people take years to reach an agreement on settlement. This means the relationship might have been over by the time the KK rape occurred.

If the caveat was for the reason above it raises some interesting questions in my mind. The following is assuming it was...

If he took out a loan to settle the property in 95 instead of selling and splitting the proceeds clearly he wanted to stay there. Yet within 2 years he had sold it and moved back with the parents. Why? It wasn't a horribly expensive property and we know he was on decent money. So financial reasons are a possibility but not an obvious reason.

Knowing what happened in that 2 year period the mind boggles as to the other possible reasons. Did he want to disassociate himself from the property? Did he need to ensure he was living with someone to stop some kind of unhinged behaviour?

We know the sale of the property went through a day or two after CG was found. A standard six week settlement period meant he was aware before CG that his time there was limited. He would have known the settlement date. Maybe he knew this was his last hurrah before moving back home. That close to settlement I'd be stunned if he took CG back to the house. There'd be upcoming sales inspections and handover meetings etc. Far too risky.

 

[JoeDetective]

. But think about it - would you really abduct someone a few minutes after you were talking to them right underneath cctv camera?

If this is the quality of the CCTV and your back is to it then hell yes.
Then when this is the only guy you can't ID on the video, I mean come on..... the only person you can't ID is the person that talks to the victim, sorry massive *advertiser censored* up by the police on this one.