Australia Claremont Serial Killer, 1996 - 1997, Perth, Western Australia - #19

[Spooks-R-Us]

[video]https://youtu.be/HnJ1bqXUnIM[/video]

Just throwing this out there.........

From the video, critical thinking is:

"....evaluating the evidence to decide for yourself, what is accurate, what is relevant, and do I have sufficient information to take a decision on this topic....."


RE: familial DNA - we do NOT have sufficient information to help us decide whether this is the CONFIRMED route to discovering BRE as the alleged CSK.

 

[Pandit]

The Acting Police Commissioner at a presser has already warned the public that mistakes were made. The Huntingdale case may have been one of them but we didn't have the science back then that could identify whose DNA was on that kimono.

If he was a suspect back then, to be sure he would have denied it was him.

If the Pandit quote is correct there is an excellent reason it has not been mentioned , this could have been stopped before it even started ... not meaning to discredit Pandit in anyway but i hope it is wrong

 

[petedavo.au]

Very well explained and great logic , thank you

The breakthrough came after testing the Kimono according to this article, a few months before the arrest of the accused.
They would've known who reported it stolen,
and if there's only four DNAs, and knew that two were related,
then the other unrelated two must be the cop and the victim,
therefore the remaining two that were a related match are the person who reported it stolen & the accused perpetrator.
https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa...ital-clue-ng-d5498c5d0593771d7f526f90646d52f0

And remember, they had DNA from the alleged Karrakatta attack and from JR and CG dump sites presumably already in the database.
Matching DNA from the Kimono to these other cases would've certainly given them the breakthrough, if the scenario I've speculated is true.

Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

 

[Spooks-R-Us]

It's my understanding that when the police opened the old Huntingdale file after forensics linked the kimono to the CSK, Bradley Robert Edwards was essentially staring straight at them. A suspect I hazard, without enough evidence to lay a charge back in the 80s......RSBM

RE: Kimono file investigative opportunities found BRE.


"It told police that the serial killer they were hunting may have been the same person who dropped the kimono. While the DNA link did not give them a name for that person, it did provide detectives with fresh investigative opportunities contained within the pages of the 1988 case file."
BBM and underline by me, and red
https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa...ital-clue-ng-d5498c5d0593771d7f526f90646d52f0


EDIT: Quote - the DNA link did NOT give them a name - not even a FAMILY name!

Sooooooo, its quite possible BRE's name was actually in HD case file as POI or suspect, but wasn't charged due to lack of evidence back in 1988, as Pandit mentioned.

I imagine it would be a PR Nightmare and difficult to explain to victim's and families, if WAPOL had the 'name' of the alleged offender-later-to-become-the-alleged-CSK within their grasps, but couldn't do anything with this information back in 1988.

Especially if this particular person's name (alleged offender) was highlighted as POI in other crimes of similar nature around that time and later.........

Sadly it took advances in forensic science to be able to arrest and charge the alleged CSK!

 

[Frequant Flyer]

Sooooooo, its quite possible BRE's name was actually in HD case file as POI or suspect, but wasn't charged due to lack of evidence back in 1988, as Pandit mentioned.

I imagine it would be a PR Nightmare and difficult to explain to victim's and families, if WAPOL had the 'name' of the alleged offender-later-to-become-the-alleged-CSK within their grasps, but couldn't do anything with this information back in 1988.

Especially if this particular person's name (alleged offender) was highlighted as POI in other crimes of similar nature around that time and later.........

Sadly it took advances in forensic science to be able to arrest and charge the alleged CSK!

If that is the case that BRE was a POI at the time, or a POI in any crime for that matter and he went on to be guilty of the later offences he is one cold SOAB

 

[Spooks-R-Us]

pdf graphic embedded in link...re-saved/reformatted as jpeg for upload

Apologise for the quality of the image - you might need your SPECTACLES!


https://www.theaustralian.com.au/ne...d/news-story/f34913420ecf0edf1a4b991994f8254d

 

[janwa]

RE: Kimono file investigative opportunities found BRE.
"It told police that the serial killer they were hunting may have been the same person who dropped the kimono. While the DNA link did not give them a name for that person, it did provide detectives with fresh investigative opportunities contained within the pages of the 1988 case file."
BBM and underline by me, and red
https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa...ital-clue-ng-d5498c5d0593771d7f526f90646d52f0
EDIT: Quote - the DNA link did NOT give them a name - not even a FAMILY name!

You are right about the DNA link but the Familial search would give a name of whoever the relative is and they work back from there. Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission by it's nature holds all convicted criminals DNA, Fingerprints etc. That name led them to identifying the DNA on the Kimono. I don't think it came from the Edwards house as some ex husband at some point made a report of it being stolen that was on this forum last year.

 

[El Gordo]

I know that people put up lists of unsolved crimes that may be related in someway to the CSK but has anyone ever looked at solved crimes
Darryl Beamish and John Button served time for murders committed by Eric Cooke for example
Andrew Mallard was loaded up for his crime in 1995 so this sort of thing was going on in the time period
Has it ever been considered that the CSK may be responsible for crimes that others are serving time for ... this is just thinking out loud and not based on anything
The consensus of those who study these matters more seriously than i do seems to be it makes no sense that he stopped ... maybe he didnt ... but someone else is doing time for it

 

[Spooks-R-Us]

RE: Familial DNA
http://www.news.com.au/national/cla...t/news-story/cdad7c5a6b825958b6d46cb11eb44c75

"As part of a continuing operation to retest old evidence with new technology, officers from the State Crime Operations team did DNA tests on the kimono.....It is understood the DNA samples came back as a match to samples already on the police database — samples that had been recovered from the body of the third Claremont victim, Ciara Glennon, and from a 17-year-old woman who was grabbed in a Claremont street in 1995 and then assaulted at the nearby Karrakatta cemetery.....While the DNA link did not give them a name for that person, it did provide detectives with fresh investigative opportunities contained within the pages of the 1988 case file...As a result of re-examining that case, it’s understood the major breakthrough — the details of which are not yet clear — came within weeks." BBM

WAPOL already had DNA sample from CG (date?)
WAPOL already had DNA sample from KK (2015?)
The KK and CG DNA samples matched (2015?)
Then they found DNA sample on Kimono that matched TWO prior samples (2016)
So THREE matching samples......

So good policing would assume that any database searches for FAMILIAL DNA matches would have occurred pretty much immediately after finding the LCN DNA sample on CG AND/OR immediately finding DNA sample on KK case. ie long before WAPOL got DNA sample from the kimono!!!!
........................................
Those sleuths that believe that Familial DNA searches AFTER the kimono link was THE key to finding BRE - please explain to me WHY police waited for a THIRD matched sample of DNA BEFORE searching Familial Databases??????
........................................
Only things I can think of is that another family member only offended and appeared on the DNA register after the CG and KK revelations. Or the KK and CG samples were not of the quality to produce identification against the database.

 

[Spooks-R-Us]

I know that people put up lists of unsolved crimes that may be related in someway to the CSK but has anyone ever looked at solved crimes
Darryl Beamish and John Button served time for murders committed by Eric Cooke for example
Andrew Mallard was loaded up for his crime in 1995 so this sort of thing was going on in the time period
Has it ever been considered that the CSK may be responsible for crimes that others are serving time for ... this is just thinking out loud and not based on anything
The consensus of those who study these matters more seriously than i do seems to be it makes no sense that he stopped ... maybe he didnt ... but someone else is doing time for it

Good point!

 

[janwa]

RE: Familial DNA
http://www.news.com.au/national/cla...t/news-story/cdad7c5a6b825958b6d46cb11eb44c75

"As part of a continuing operation to retest old evidence with new technology, officers from the State Crime Operations team did DNA tests on the kimono.....It is understood the DNA samples came back as a match to samples already on the police database — samples that had been recovered from the body of the third Claremont victim, Ciara Glennon, and from a 17-year-old woman who was grabbed in a Claremont street in 1995 and then assaulted at the nearby Karrakatta cemetery.....While the DNA link did not give them a name for that person, it did provide detectives with fresh investigative opportunities contained within the pages of the 1988 case file...As a result of re-examining that case, it’s understood the major breakthrough — the details of which are not yet clear — came within weeks." BBM

WAPOL already had DNA sample from CG (date?)
WAPOL already had DNA sample from KK (2015?)
The KK and CG DNA samples matched (2015?)
Then they found DNA sample on Kimono that matched TWO prior samples (2016)
So THREE matching samples......

So good policing would assume that any database searches for FAMILIAL DNA matches would have occurred pretty much immediately after finding the LCN DNA sample on CG AND/OR immediately finding DNA sample on KK case. ie long before WAPOL got DNA sample from the kimono!!!!
........................................
Those sleuths that believe that Familial DNA searches AFTER the kimono link was THE key to finding BRE - please explain to me WHY police waited for a THIRD matched sample of DNA BEFORE searching Familial Databases??????
........................................
Only things I can think of is that another family member only offended and appeared on the DNA register after the CG and KK revelations. Or the KK and CG samples were not of the quality to produce identification against the database.

It's starting to sound like a touch of the Yorkshire Ripper he was interviewed about 9 times, even after people had given accurate descriptions of him.

Did a 'minor' attack victim early on in the piece name him or someone ring the police and put his name forward but it wasn't followed up.

 

[Spooks-R-Us]

It's starting to sound like a touch of the Yorkshire Ripper he was interviewed about 9 times, even after people had given accurate descriptions of him.

Did a 'minor' attack victim early on in the piece name him or someone ring the police and put his name forward but it wasn't followed up.

I was thinking maybe a date-rape scenario, where it was a case of he-said-she-said.???

<modsnip - to comply with Australian law>

Perhaps similarities in case features or the (alleged) use of silk garments??

IMO Somewhere something happened to someone and they domehow spoke up.

Just all speculation .....


............................................
Posts my opinion unless source included. All my original text/images are my personal copyright and can't be reproduced outside of WebSleuths without my permission.
[emoji317][emoji317][emoji317]

 

[Frequant Flyer]

It could be s simple as someone who was a victim or potential victim of a less serious matter turning up at little athletics and recognizing him ... Maybe not at first , but if they attended long enough something may have jogged a memory ... He was pretty much in the area he grew up in , close enough for the past to find him one day

 

[aequitas]

That is why it so important that police track these types of incidents and take them seriously. All rapists/serial killers escalate from common lesser crimes whether that be masturbating in front of female strangers, stealing underwear off clothlines, peeping through windows, animal cruelty, arson, or a combination thereof. Here, so far, it seems the kimono incident is his downfall before he honed his skills. I wonder if there were suspicions it was him at the time because cops knew he was trouble or had some unusual proclivities and they just couldn't prove it.

 

[CyberRH]

I posted on 1250 how familial DNA works the simple answer is think of how they match fingerprints. The unknown DNA is put through a DNA criminal data base 'scanner' such as crimtrack, which picks up any matches of something called STRs. They would then make a list of the likely suspects and I presume make something like a family tree. A 50% match would indicate a son or brother 25% a nephew, uncle or grandfather.

Good one Janwa. This is a guess now, but I’m guessing WAPOL also have access to the extremely vast ANCESTRY DNA, Gedmatch and other databases (I use them to do my family tree). If you are a member of such DNA websites, it is relatively easy, in fact it is very easy to run a scan of your DNA (or in WAPOLs case - DNA gathered from a crime scene) against the database to see who the closest matches are. They could have come up with say a 200 centremorgans match (that’s like a very close relative) and then worked their way from there.
Just my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lampformypath]

I know that people put up lists of unsolved crimes that may be related in someway to the CSK but has anyone ever looked at solved crimes
Darryl Beamish and John Button served time for murders committed by Eric Cooke for example
Andrew Mallard was loaded up for his crime in 1995 so this sort of thing was going on in the time period
Has it ever been considered that the CSK may be responsible for crimes that others are serving time for ... this is just thinking out loud and not based on anything
The consensus of those who study these matters more seriously than i do seems to be it makes no sense that he stopped ... maybe he didnt ... but someone else is doing time for it

I totally agree with you EL GORDO! I don't think he stopped, I think he changed his MO and it's totally possible some other bloke is "doin' the time for his crime" (now there's some poetry for you Spooks). Would be a laborious task to delve into this, and nigh on impossible to pin to CSK because, I think, it would not "look" like his "signature". Fascinating to contemplate though. But hey, maybe with the DNA advancements if police were to suspect that the wrong person had been convicted in a case they could link it, but would this ever happen? They have so many unsolved cases, cold cases, and all those other serial killers running amok all over the place, as per my previous post, why would they open that Pandora's Box! Close lid, next case....

 

[petedavo.au]

RE: Familial DNA
http://www.news.com.au/national/cla...t/news-story/cdad7c5a6b825958b6d46cb11eb44c75

"As part of a continuing operation to retest old evidence with new technology, officers from the State Crime Operations team did DNA tests on the kimono.....It is understood the DNA samples came back as a match to samples already on the police database — samples that had been recovered from the body of the third Claremont victim, Ciara Glennon, and from a 17-year-old woman who was grabbed in a Claremont street in 1995 and then assaulted at the nearby Karrakatta cemetery.....While the DNA link did not give them a name for that person, it did provide detectives with fresh investigative opportunities contained within the pages of the 1988 case file...As a result of re-examining that case, it’s understood the major breakthrough — the details of which are not yet clear — came within weeks." BBM

WAPOL already had DNA sample from CG (date?)
WAPOL already had DNA sample from KK (2015?)
The KK and CG DNA samples matched (2015?)
Then they found DNA sample on Kimono that matched TWO prior samples (2016)
So THREE matching samples......

So good policing would assume that any database searches for FAMILIAL DNA matches would have occurred pretty much immediately after finding the LCN DNA sample on CG AND/OR immediately finding DNA sample on KK case. ie long before WAPOL got DNA sample from the kimono!!!!
........................................
Those sleuths that believe that Familial DNA searches AFTER the kimono link was THE key to finding BRE - please explain to me WHY police waited for a THIRD matched sample of DNA BEFORE searching Familial Databases??????
........................................
Only things I can think of is that another family member only offended and appeared on the DNA register after the CG and KK revelations. Or the KK and CG samples were not of the quality to produce identification against the database.

Because there was no familial DNA on the database until the Kimono was tested?
ie, the person that hung the kimono on the clothesline and reported it stolen, was maybe a family member?

Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

 

[Frequant Flyer]

Good one Janwa. This is a guess now, but I’m guessing WAPOL also have access to the extremely vast ANCESTRY DNA, Gedmatch and other databases (I use them to do my family tree). If you are a member of such DNA websites, it is relatively easy, in fact it is very easy to run a scan of your DNA (or in WAPOLs case - DNA gathered from a crime scene) against the database to see who the closest matches are. They could have come up with say a 200 centremorgans match (that’s like a very close relative) and then worked their way from there.
Just my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

very clever thinking , there is possibly among all the small print nobody reads permissions you are giving to allow this to happen , and or police dna are a part of their data base

 

[no name]

RE: Familial DNA
http://www.news.com.au/national/cla...t/news-story/cdad7c5a6b825958b6d46cb11eb44c75

"As part of a continuing operation to retest old evidence with new technology, officers from the State Crime Operations team did DNA tests on the kimono.....It is understood the DNA samples came back as a match to samples already on the police database — samples that had been recovered from the body of the third Claremont victim, Ciara Glennon, and from a 17-year-old woman who was grabbed in a Claremont street in 1995 and then assaulted at the nearby Karrakatta cemetery.....While the DNA link did not give them a name for that person, it did provide detectives with fresh investigative opportunities contained within the pages of the 1988 case file...As a result of re-examining that case, it’s understood the major breakthrough — the details of which are not yet clear — came within weeks." BBM

WAPOL already had DNA sample from CG (date?)
WAPOL already had DNA sample from KK (2015?)
The KK and CG DNA samples matched (2015?)
Then they found DNA sample on Kimono that matched TWO prior samples (2016)
So THREE matching samples......

So good policing would assume that any database searches for FAMILIAL DNA matches would have occurred pretty much immediately after finding the LCN DNA sample on CG AND/OR immediately finding DNA sample on KK case. ie long before WAPOL got DNA sample from the kimono!!!!
........................................
Those sleuths that believe that Familial DNA searches AFTER the kimono link was THE key to finding BRE - please explain to me WHY police waited for a THIRD matched sample of DNA BEFORE searching Familial Databases??????
........................................
Only things I can think of is that another family member only offended and appeared on the DNA register after the CG and KK revelations. Or the KK and CG samples were not of the quality to produce identification against the database.

The KK/CG DNA link was made long before 2015.
You are exactly right Spooks, if the familial DNA link was they key to finding BRE, they didnt need to wait till they got the DNA from the Kimono to do that unless the famillial DNA wasnt on the database until after 2015-2016. If the samples weren't of sufficient quality to produce identification, how were all the other suspects ruled out back in 2008 though? I personally think BREs name was staring them in the face when they reopened the Huntingdale file which just goes to show how little info they were able to glean from DNA back in the late 80's & how little it was actually relied upon as commonplace in regard to testing.

At time of Greenough Massacre, 24/2/93, according to Forensic cop Bryn Jones on CI australia episode it was said DNA testing was so primitive it couldnt identify anyone.

One direct quote in relation to semen analysis in that case:
"we did have a very early DNA analysis capacity but it was limited to only one loci, which essentially it meant it didnt have sufficient discriminatory powers to suggest that the semen belonged to a particular person. It was more used in those days in conjunction with blood grouping to eliminate people or suggest that a person could not be eliminated as the donor".

 

[Credulious]

Because there was no familial DNA on the database until the Kimono was tested?
ie, the person that hung the kimono on the clothesline and reported it stolen, was maybe a family member?

Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

Retesting all the WA evidence room with familial DNA technology they discovered a xx% match with a relative.

So while the accused's name was not on the database they found a familial match to someone who had their name on the database for another reason not related.

Thats the logical discovery unless police have gone outside the criminal RDBMS which there has been arrangements with clients on ancestry dna databases assured datasets wont be accessed by police.

The accused is then rechecked with a DNA sample from the crime scene samples to ensure a 100% match to the accused.

So they new it was a relative but had to find the relative who matched the samples taken from multiple crime scenes.

The familial technology finds families, not just individuals.

This is how although not as sophisticated ancestry databases find relationships of families which are mapped.