Australia Claremont Serial Killer, 1996 - 1997, Perth, Western Australia - #20

[petedavo.au]

Exactly!
And was there a relative on the database at all?


............................................
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]

The scenario I described earlier with the Kimono doesn't need anyone on the database already.

If two samples off the kimono were a familial match, and one of them matched other samples from the other crime scenes. Then the familial matching sample on the Kimono must've been the person who hung it on the clothesline. Then all they need to know is who reported it missing. No pre existing database entry required. They've got their man being a sibling or offspring of the person that hung the Kimono on the clothesline. Simple.
That is why I'm going to guess: that the accused stole the Kimono off his own folks clothesline and this explains why he was arrested only after that item was tested.
IMO
Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

 

[LennyAustralia]

yes very problematic if dropped outside.
I'm hoping for inside the house....

Only problematic for the Huntingdale assault. His DNA will still match the CSK crimes.

 

[Frequant Flyer]

Freqantas Flyer - that banter on Facebook between brothers - well that still has to be revealed! I reckon both brothers would have been on a list from the Huntingdale attack of suspects especially living in Huntingdale. Quite possibly started as a "crush" from school or from stalking and peeping nearby.

I'm not familiar - but, when you have been convicted of a crime they don't take everyone's DNA surely. I doubt in Juvie Court DNA is taken from the little recidivists.

When is DNA even taken on adult perps?

When you get busted for Drink Driving (I know its a mug shot) + fingerprints but, is it DNA? or, is it when you are found guilty and transferred into the Slammer? Then you are definitely on the police data base DNA.

Or, is it only serious crimes? 981,000 persons are on the National Data base according to that last link from PressReader.

Is the police Crime Data base DNA different to the National Data base DNA of 981,000. Oh I just end up with more questions (as usual). I don't even know if perps have access to FaceBook in Jail or access to WS (that's one scary thought). JMO

Im not totally sure but I think in WA if are pulled over now for breath test they also take swabs for drug tests , they also take blood samples I think if you are over the limit ... These would qualify as Dna but whether they are are kept as such I do not know

since the late 80s it was the case if you were charged for a crime they asked to take Dna samples at the same time they took fingerprints ... This was when charged , not when found guilty ... I don't imagine this has changed ... That is how they got the data base

and the obvious may have been looking us in the face , maybe it was a simple roadside booze bus or policeman with a reason to breath test etc. that got the Dna that led to a conviction

 

[lampformypath]

I've always suspected they take a DNA sample when they do the PKU test on new borns. Even if you have a home birth the midwife has to take a PKU test. But then I'm suspicious by nature.

Oh WOW Janwa that IS a scary thought! I remember both my babies having to have that bloody test and the Gestapo nurses who administered it in a tiny country hospital. "Ve have vays of making your babies talk!" Now I'm thinking it was an even more sinister prick!!

 

[b4u]

They've got their man being a sibling or offspring of the person that hung the Kimono on the clothesline. Simple.
That is why I'm going to guess: that the accused stole the Kimono off his own folks clothesline and this explains why he was arrested only after that item was tested.
IMO

But what if the accused was just helping hang up or take down the washing off his folks clothesline.
And then someone else stole the kimono. Possibly using gloves?

 

[Pandit]

I think they did and this is about the time his life started to unravel, his wife left him. The screws started to turn.

He'd been apparently inactive for twenty years, this article assumes he's still alive. The police could afford to take their time with the aim of poking him enough he starts moving evidence about under watchful eyes. Watch what he does on certain dates or anniversaries, who his friends are, who rings him for his birthday etc., all his habits. IMO they need about a year provided public safety could be assured.

Still need to find Sarah.

Yes, I know an article states somewhere the belief MACRO had only just found out who he was when the arrest was made but I am unconvinced.

I'm wondering if this article was a subliminal message to unhinge the alleged CSK?
In Jan 2016 did WAPOL already have the accused on their radar????


............................................
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]

 

[Spooks-R-Us]

I've always suspected they take a DNA sample when they do the PKU test on new borns. Even if you have a home birth the midwife has to take a PKU test. But then I'm suspicious by nature.

re:Familial DNA

BTK Denis Radar was arrested after a court order allowed DNA profile extraction from his college age daughter's pap smear that had been stored for 5 years!


"Perhaps the most famous familial search case took place in 2005 with the identification and arrest of the "BTK" - Bound Torture & Kill serial killer, Dennis Rader. Rader was responsible for ten horrific murders in Wichita, Kansas from 1974 to 1991. The DNA profile that Rader left on his victims had been run periodically through CODIS without obtaining a hit.
In 2004, law enforcement focused on Rader after he sent an anonymous package to police with a story about his crimes on a computer disk. The disk was traced back to a computer at a church where he volunteered. Before police arrested Radar they wanted to be sure he was the killer. A warrant was issued to obtain genetic material from Rader's daughter, a 5-year old pap smear which was stored at the Kansas State University Hospital where she had been a student. When the daughter's DNA profile was compared with the DNA profile of Rader it was found to be a perfect familial match. Law enforcement was confident that they had found the serial killer and arrested Rader.
In June 2005, Rader entered a guilty plea for the ten killings and two months later he was sentenced to life for each murder."

So we could presume the accused's sister or mother may also have had a pap smear in the last few years!
LINK supplied by Janwa http://www.dnaforensics.com/familialsearches.aspx

 

[Pandit]

So I propose if this is how it was being played out, one his male relatives was actually arrested just before the article was published and hazard a guess that charge did not proceed (not in court records) but they got his DNA. And it was probably the brother. At that time they'd already made a connection between the kimono, CG and Karrakatta and the brother was just eliminated as DNA depositor on the kimono, leaving them as a surety looking straight at Bradley. And Bradley probably now knows it. And oh look ... Bradley works for Telstra and was driving a white station wagon!

That he was a Telstra tech, might have put a slightly different spin on how the investigation rolled out.

I think they did and this is about the time his life started to unravel, his wife left him. The screws started to turn.

He'd been apparently inactive for twenty years, this article assumes he's still alive. The police could afford to take their time with the aim of poking him enough he starts moving evidence about under watchful eyes. Watch what he does on certain dates or anniversaries, who his friends are, who rings him for his birthday etc., all his habits. IMO they need about a year provided public safety could be assured.

Still need to find Sarah.

Yes, I know an article states somewhere the belief MACRO had only just found out who he was when the arrest was made but I am unconvinced.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I've always suspected they take a DNA sample when they do the PKU test on new borns. Even if you have a home birth the midwife has to take a PKU test. But then I'm suspicious by nature.

In Australia every newborn baby is offered a newborn screening test to identify those at risk for rare, but serious, medical conditions including PKU, hypothyroidism and cystic fibrosis.

The following article explains.

https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/newborn-screening

 

[Spinnaker]

But what if the accused was just helping hang up or take down the washing off his folks clothesline.
And then someone else stole the kimono. Possibly using gloves?

Reposting the photo of Kimono - assume this is a replica kimono and hopefully not THE Kimono?

 

[Frequant Flyer]

But what if the accused was just helping hang up or take down the washing off his folks clothesline.
And then someone else stole the kimono. Possibly using gloves?

thanks for this , I appreciate when people look for the simplest solution

 

[petedavo.au]

But what if the accused was just helping hang up or take down the washing off his folks clothesline.
And then someone else stole the kimono. Possibly using gloves?

Then. there'd have to be innocent explanations of how matching DNA got onto the samples from the other crime scenes, if that was the case, they'd still be looking for someone else. IMO.

Only really know when this is resolved in court, and books are written about the investigation.
Then there will be documentaries and at least one movie. There will be people making a motza from all this human suffering, but they'll provide all the answers and salacious details that the public crave.

Sent from my HTC 2PQ910 using Tapatalk

 

[Spinnaker]

Originally Posted by b4u
But what if the accused was just helping hang up or take down the washing off his folks clothesline.

And then someone else stole the kimono. Possibly using gloves?

thanks for this , I appreciate when people look for the simplest solution

Would imagine that it could be quite difficult to leave DNA on an item of clothing, just by hanging up on clothes line and that DNA would have come from body fluids or hair & skin - has anyone got any expertise/knowledge in this area of DNA collection?

How easy is it to leave DNA on an item of clothing?

 

[Frequant Flyer]

Thanks to b4u I have given thought to simpler solutions to the kimono

where did the idea it was taken from a clothesline come from ... If people know it was taken from a clothesline they must know who's clothesline it was

it may not have been taken from a clothesline at all , it may never have been washed for all I know .

The clothesline may just be another band wagon

 

[Canning Vale]

If JR had ventured onto the upper level for socializing, no one came forward as having seen her – unless she remained on the balcony.

 

[BReVeTTe]

But what if the accused was just helping hang up or take down the washing off his folks clothesline.
And then someone else stole the kimono. Possibly using gloves?

there is also the DNA identified from KK and CG cases.
if we knew from what source those particular samples came eg. semen, or direct fingerprint in blood or on bodily evidence, one would speculate it must only be some form of direct involvement which led to the recent charges and an arrest.
I doubt we will be learning the fine details of this anytime in the near future - if ever, so at this stage we need to have patience ; faith in the reasoning of current macro and their evidence ; and trust in that the prosecution, defence, and all involved along the way, have done, and will continue to do, everything correctly within the law to achieve a "just" outcome.
[emoji887]

 

[Frequant Flyer]

Originally Posted by b4u
But what if the accused was just helping hang up or take down the washing off his folks clothesline.

And then someone else stole the kimono. Possibly using gloves?

Would imagine that it could be quite difficult to leave DNA on an item of clothing, just by hanging up on clothes line and that DNA would have come from body fluids or hair & skin - has anyone got any expertise/knowledge in this area of DNA collection?

How easy is it to leave DNA on an item of clothing?

i would not think you could get dna from simply hanging the washing , maybe it was his all along and had multitudes of dna , maybe he was wearing it on his adventures, it's all maybes , but for my own part I'm discounting the washing line altogether

 

[Spinnaker]

Just imagine if the alleged CSK NEVER dropped the alleged kimono when allegedly escaping alleged HD crime scene!
Bet he's kicking himself now! (allegedly)

The below article mentions that "The man responsible reportedly dropped it (the kimono) while running from the house, where it was found and put into storage at WA's evidence recital centre" :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4063928/Silk-kimono-stolen-clothesline-28-years-ago-key-clue-solving-Claremont-killings-cold-case-arrest-Bradley-Robert-Edwards.html

 

[Credulious]

Looking through here's all the discussion on PKU tests and Guthrie tests last year.

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/s...-Perth-Western-Australia-10/page25&styleid=21

 

[Credulious]

A WOMAN’S silk dressing gown stolen off a washing line 28 years ago is believed to have been the vital clue that helped lead police to finally make an arrest in the Claremont serial killer case.

It can be revealed that in 1988 — eight years before Sarah Spiers was abducted off a Claremont street — the white kimono was dropped by an intruder who broke into the home of an 18-year-old Huntingdale woman and tried to rape her.

Her screams caused him to flee and police believe the stolen kimono was accidentally dropped by the man as he ran out of the home.

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