Australia Claremont Serial Killer, 1996 - 1997, Perth, Western Australia - #5

[Bartholemeus]

OK. Conspiracy theory #1. Frankie is correct, the car never stopped. It slowed down to check her out, and then parked somewhere a little further on, preparing for a blitz attack. Likewise, the story of the men in the car who spot SS before her disappearance also is not real. Both aren't true, which shifts the weight now heavily towards blitz attacks for all 4 girls. The police made both of these things up for the CIA documentary to make the CSK believe they are looking for a taxi driver (or the like) scenario where the girls willingly got in the car. They also make up the story about MM to make the CSK believe they're looking for the wrong guy. At the end of the CIA doco, the policeman says he wants three things to occur: 1. Driver of the car that drove past / near SS (behind the one with the guys in it) to come forward 2. MM to come forward 3. Owner of the car stopped talking to CG to come forward. In actual fact, all 3 of these things are red-herrings and don't exist. After all, if MM is a red-herring, why not the other stuff?

Thoughts?

There are 3 options with CG

1. There was a car. CG got in. (pick up theory)
2. There was a car, saw CG and possibly had quick conversation, parked up further ahead and waylaid her (blitz theory)
3. The CSK didn't drive past and was always laying in wait for a victim (similar to Karra victim) (blitz theory)


Red Herrings

There's a school of though MM is a red herring based on the camera work. A few posters here heavily analysed it and Sutton determined an approximate time interval the Conti's CCTV system would switch views. It was then determined that police likely had a front view of MM.

Let's consider what Macro want to achieve by the CIA doco;

1. Maximum exposure
2. A specific, focused and well tailored campaign. They wouldn't have gone for a generic blanket approach. They would have chosen a few things they want to focus on
3. A call to action from the public

If we assume that's what they set out to do then let's match it to the doco;

1. The decided releasing some new information would get widespread public interest. The MM video certainly achieved their goal
2. Who knows but there's a school of thought that they were parading a POI to see if anyone would ring in and provide info
3. They asked for the drivers of those two cars to come forward

Now let's consider the other two apparently "new" bits of info;

Neither really lead the public to believe the focus was on someone else. I can't really see a purpose for saying cars were witnessed when they weren't. I also can't see a reason to fabrictae the part about MAP. Of course this is the part where they could have been implying to the CSK they had someone else in their sights, but this doesn't really match what it appears they were trying to get out of the campaign.

Also consider Stanbury was reasonably new at this stage. He would have started from a top down approach and would have made a genuine public appeal for new info before he resorted to a trickey campaign directed towards the CSK.

I can't see any reason to make that stuff up but on the other hand, it does bother me why it took Macro 12 years to release the car info. You'd think if they had that info they would have released it earlier?

 

[Frankie1972]

There are 3 options with CG

1. There was a car. CG got in. (pick up theory)
2. There was a car, saw CG and possibly had quick conversation, parked up further ahead and waylaid her (blitz theory)
3. The CSK didn't drive past and was always laying in wait for a victim (similar to Karra victim) (blitz theory)


Red Herrings

There's a school of though MM is a red herring based on the camera work. A few posters here heavily analysed it and Sutton determined an approximate time interval the Conti's CCTV system would switch views. It was then determined that police likely had a front view of MM.

Let's consider what Macro want to achieve by the CIA doco;

1. Maximum exposure
2. A specific, focused and well tailored campaign. They wouldn't have gone for a generic blanket approach. They would have chosen a few things they want to focus on
3. A call to action from the public

If we assume that's what they set out to do then let's match it to the doco;

1. The decided releasing some new information would get widespread public interest. The MM video certainly achieved their goal
2. Who knows but there's a school of thought that they were parading a POI to see if anyone would ring in and provide info
3. They asked for the drivers of those two cars to come forward

Now let's consider the other two apparently "new" bits of info;

Neither really lead the public to believe the focus was on someone else. I can't really see a purpose for saying cars were witnessed when they weren't. I also can't see a reason to fabrictae the part about MAP. Of course this is the part where they could have been implying to the CSK they had someone else in their sights, but this doesn't really match what it appears they were trying to get out of the campaign.

Also consider Stanbury was reasonably new at this stage. He would have started from a top down approach and would have made a genuine public appeal for new info before he resorted to a trickey campaign directed towards the CSK.

I can't see any reason to make that stuff up but on the other hand, it does bother me why it took Macro 12 years to release the car info. You'd think if they had that info they would have released it earlier?

IMO number 3 the CSK did not drive past and was always laying waiting for CG

 

[escapehere]

There are 3 options with CG
1. There was a car. CG got in. (pick up theory)
2. There was a car, saw CG and possibly had quick conversation, parked up further ahead and waylaid her (blitz theory)
3. The CSK didn't drive past and was always laying in wait for a victim (similar to Karra victim) (blitz theory)

I'm ruling out 3 (IMO of course) based on the fact Frankie's mate identified a white commodore wagon. Interestingly, even though the cop only verbally says "all we know about it is it was a light-coloured vehicle" in the CIA doco, the actual car in the re-enactment is clearly a white VS commodore wagon. This can't be coincidence. Although Commodores (we called them "common-dores") were ridiculously popular in the 90s, I just think the chance of someone identifying one driving by CG (identified in the immediate days that follow, not 12 years later) and recent confirmations Jane was taken in a white commodore wagon is beyond coincidence at this point. Also, given Frankie's mate knew enough about cars to identify it, he would definitely identified it if it was a taxi, only because while some taxis were Commodores, the overwhelming majority were Falcons, and it would've stuck out like DBs to a car guy. You notice these things. If he was able to identify it by the brake lights, as previously mentioned, he would've seen the taxi light on the roof.

Red Herrings

There's a school of though MM is a red herring based on the camera work. A few posters here heavily analysed it and Sutton determined an approximate time interval the Conti's CCTV system would switch views. It was then determined that police likely had a front view of MM.

My leanings (60-70%) towards it being a red herring are based on Sutton's work, and also statements by GreenDevil. Although there are a lot of nutters here who claim to be "in the know" who clearly aren't, GreenDevil has repeatedly and consistently said this was a red herring (and he/she hasn't made such definitive comments about other stuff). This makes me think GreenDevil does have some kind of inside knowledge. The nutters aren't able to be consistent for so long without claiming to be in the know about some other things which end up clearly being wrong. IMO, both GreenDevil and Peter Kertin are either ex-cops or have links to macro/ex-macro people in some other way, so I rate what they say much higher. Just based on my observations of course.

I can't see any reason to make that stuff up but on the other hand, it does bother me why it took Macro 12 years to release the car info. You'd think if they had that info they would have released it earlier?

This is why it is important to me to try and find the 1997 Channel 7 re-enactment. If that makes mention of the car, we can confirm this was not new information.

 

[escapehere]

GreenDevil, you've consistently said the MM thing is purely a red-herring used to invoke a reaction from POIs that the police can then monitor. What kind of "reactions" would you expect the POIs to display, and how would the police observe this? For example, if a POI's house was bugged, would the police be listening in to see if they laughed or maybe said "sorry fellas you're way off base" when watching the doco? Or is it more about their behaviour and movements after the doco was aired? How would we know the POIs even had Foxtel and actually watched the docos or knew about it?

 

[Bartholemeus]

IMO number 3 the CSK did not drive past and was always laying waiting for CG

But wouldn't have the car driver come forward (even if he/she was just driving past)? There was blanket media coverage.

 

[Bartholemeus]

Did LW ever where a hat

I don't believe so but couldn't be sure. His hair was a lot longer that what he wears in the images publicly available. His hair was dark and wavy and maybe a couple of inches long. It wasn't long hair but it wasn't short back and sides either.

 

[GreenDevil]

It's a combination of both. Telephone intercepts, listening for comments/chatter about the case. Maybe even covert sureveillance watching to see if the POI's movements are suddenly strange or meeting with contacts that were previously unknown.
I do not have any inside knowledge of the case, but I do have a background that makes me well informed of police procedures and criminal investigations.

 

[Parkie]

I think LE bugged suspects homes & pc`s. And still do ! Probably even ppl who might have hacked his PC. Maybe police put a trace on his car too. A watch would be issued for all POI`s number plates. When police plate scanners automatically identify a noted plate the Police car`s computer shows that. If a POI comes from say the city along Stirling hgy, they might even know before he gets there. Probably noting his mobile, if not the vehicle too. My money is the Detectives would be in a non descript vehicle videoing the suspects. Lets just say on the left carpark just after the suspect turns right into Leura Ave... Maybe a non descript new 4wd wagon, waiting ten mins before he rocks up,videoing the suspect & his car driving up Leura Ave. Then the next team takes over if needed. Follow up vehicle. Then another team and that would be the D`s having a pint inside the Conti. Just my take from what I can guess. Maybe not a guess.

 

[Parkie]

Maybe they track his car so he can`t do anything about those who kicked in his driveway/path lights.....

 

[Parkie]

I would say the D`s probably would have parked around the place. St Quentin Ave, Gugeri st. too.

Hey I wonder what has happened since the last news that they had not viewed street footage from when they went missing. To try to identify the guy possibly doing bog laps?

 

[*Indigo*]

Some promising new research technology -
"A Canberra forensic laboratory will be the first in Australia to test the ancestry of crime scene DNA, opening up a world of potentially predicting a suspect's eye or skin colour.
The University of Canberra secured funding last month to bring its forensic laboratory up to the standards required for accreditation and hopes to offer the service to police from 2017.
Forensic genetics expert Dr Dennis McNevin said rather than searching for a DNA match, the technology could provide investigators with a molecular photo fit of the suspect..."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-...ke-molecular-sketch-of-crime-suspects/7589620

 

[88mph]

Some promising new research technology -
"A Canberra forensic laboratory will be the first in Australia to test the ancestry of crime scene DNA, opening up a world of potentially predicting a suspect's eye or skin colour.
The University of Canberra secured funding last month to bring its forensic laboratory up to the standards required for accreditation and hopes to offer the service to police from 2017.
Forensic genetics expert Dr Dennis McNevin said rather than searching for a DNA match, the technology could provide investigators with a molecular photo fit of the suspect..."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-...ke-molecular-sketch-of-crime-suspects/7589620

So if we have an accredited independent body analysing DNA in Australia who happens to create a photo fit similar to a suspect, then what? There's no precedent to push a conviction. Circumstantial at best.

You'd assume MACRO would have done this overseas and already know the eye colour etc.

Sounds like a game of guess who.

 

[Bartholemeus]

It's still a good idea. Imagine they get an image of the CSK and it's someone not on their list. This is the best possible scenario. They find the guy and then put a strategy together to find evidence. Or what if it is one of the POIs. It will confirm who to focus on and will give them a level of confidence. It won't be admissible but there is a lot of upside.

 

[Simi]

This is interesting. Could this “serial killer” taxi driver be linked to the Claremont murders?

Sharron Phillips: "My dad could've been a serial killer"
A SON of a taxi driver has come forward and claimed his dead father is respoSnsible for the death of Ipswich woman Sharron Phillips who disappeared more than three decades ago.
The man also claimed his father was responsible for other murders but did not elaborate on them during an recent interview.
Ms Phillips, 20, disappeared on May 8, 1986 after her car ran out of petrol about 11pm on Ipswich Rd at Wacol.
She had called her boyfriend from nearby service station and asked him to pick her up but when he arrived, she was gone.
Ms Phillips has not been seen or heard from since and is presumed to have been murdered.
The man, who wished to remain anonymous, told Nine News Brisbane the information he revealed to police led to the recent search at Carole Park.
He said his father told him about the location in 2002 during a death bed confession.
Police spent two weeks in May removing soil and debris from two drains at Cobalt St but failed to find any evidence or human remains.
The man said in the interview with Nine News his father dropped his taxi at the same spot Ms Phillips called her boyfriend from the night she disappeared.
The man said when he arrived to pick up his father after his shift he saw the taxi parked suspiciously down a dirt lane.
He said his father's behaviour was erratic and he demanded to use his car.
"He said, 'Wait here and keep an eye out for police' and then he reversed the car around to the back," the man said.
The man said he heard the boot of his car close and "loud thumping" on the drive home which his father dismissed when he questioned him about it.
"He did not really acknowledge me, he just turned up the stereo and kept driving," he said.
The man said as soon as they were home he got out of the car and his father drove off somewhere alone.
He said days later he found a handbag and women's shoes in his car.
"I came forward because they (the Phillips family) were blaming the father, and I was 99% sure it was not the father . . . I wanted the truth to come out," the man said.
Homicide chief Detective Acting Superintendent Damien Hanson told media at the Carole Park search site in May the man's information was extremely credible.
He said there was a high level of detail provided to them which had been verified from previous investigations and included information which had never been made public.
"We can say with certainty he (the father) has a reason to be in that area at that time with his work," he said at the weekend.
"That was a changeover point for his taxi. That puts him right at that phone box at that time."
A Queensland Police Service spokesman told the Queensland Times the man is assisting police and the investigation is ongoing.

http://www.qt.com.au/news/new-twist-in-sharron-phillips-mystery/3059850/

 

[Peter Kurten]

This is interesting. Could this “serial killer” taxi driver be linked to the Claremont murders?

Sharron Phillips: "My dad could've been a serial killer"
A SON of a taxi driver has come forward and claimed his dead father is respoSnsible for the death of Ipswich woman Sharron Phillips who disappeared more than three decades ago.
The man also claimed his father was responsible for other murders but did not elaborate on them during an recent interview.
Ms Phillips, 20, disappeared on May 8, 1986 after her car ran out of petrol about 11pm on Ipswich Rd at Wacol.
She had called her boyfriend from nearby service station and asked him to pick her up but when he arrived, she was gone.
Ms Phillips has not been seen or heard from since and is presumed to have been murdered.
The man, who wished to remain anonymous, told Nine News Brisbane the information he revealed to police led to the recent search at Carole Park.
He said his father told him about the location in 2002 during a death bed confession.
Police spent two weeks in May removing soil and debris from two drains at Cobalt St but failed to find any evidence or human remains.
The man said in the interview with Nine News his father dropped his taxi at the same spot Ms Phillips called her boyfriend from the night she disappeared.
The man said when he arrived to pick up his father after his shift he saw the taxi parked suspiciously down a dirt lane.
He said his father's behaviour was erratic and he demanded to use his car.
"He said, 'Wait here and keep an eye out for police' and then he reversed the car around to the back," the man said.
The man said he heard the boot of his car close and "loud thumping" on the drive home which his father dismissed when he questioned him about it.
"He did not really acknowledge me, he just turned up the stereo and kept driving," he said.
The man said as soon as they were home he got out of the car and his father drove off somewhere alone.
He said days later he found a handbag and women's shoes in his car.
"I came forward because they (the Phillips family) were blaming the father, and I was 99% sure it was not the father . . . I wanted the truth to come out," the man said.
Homicide chief Detective Acting Superintendent Damien Hanson told media at the Carole Park search site in May the man's information was extremely credible.
He said there was a high level of detail provided to them which had been verified from previous investigations and included information which had never been made public.
"We can say with certainty he (the father) has a reason to be in that area at that time with his work," he said at the weekend.
"That was a changeover point for his taxi. That puts him right at that phone box at that time."
A Queensland Police Service spokesman told the Queensland Times the man is assisting police and the investigation is ongoing.

http://www.qt.com.au/news/new-twist-in-sharron-phillips-mystery/3059850/

Great spot but it's likely he'd be far too old

 

[c4rtm4n]

One of those papers I linked to a couple of weeks ago discussed Rossmo's Formula. I thought I'd have a go at implementing it. Rossmo says you need 5 data points as a bare minimum, where CSK only has 3... Since SS has not been found, any plot is not going to be correct, especially when the sites are so far apart, but I did it nonetheless.

Here is Rossmo with 3 points (black squares). Claremont, JR and CG.

The idea is that the more red the square, the more probable it is an anchor point for the perp, the closer to blue the more unlikely.

Then I added in the Karrakatta rape and got this:

I was somewhat disheartened, even though I knew that there was not enough data to begin with, so I decided to try another Australian case.

So I found some data on Sydney's Granny Killer from circa 1990 and got this:

The white bounded squares are his anchor points. The bottom one is Mosman RSL which is where the killer would hang out before and/or after most of the crimes. The top white square is the estimate of where he lived (the street, not address). Looking at this you'd have to think the killer spends a lot of time in downtown Mosman. And, yes, you could probably have come to the same conclusion with a UBD and a compass.....

 

[Peter Kurten]

Cartman, are you able to generate one of those jeopardy surfaces with the following 7 locations?

1. Rowe Park Tennis Court (North Side)
2. -31.972150, 115.8000923
3. X of Stirling RD/Stirling HWY
4. X of McNeil ST/Stirling HWY
5. X of Gugeri ST/Bayview TCE
6. X of Alfred RD/Servetus ST
7. X of Avion WY/Stirling HWY

I've adjusted the dump locations to better facilitate the values and parameters of the formula and create something visually workable.

 

[c4rtm4n]

Cartman, are you able to generate one of those jeopardy surfaces with the following 7 locations?

1. Rowe Park Tennis Court (North Side)
2. -31.972150, 115.8000923
3. X of Stirling RD/Stirling HWY
4. X of McNeil ST/Stirling HWY
5. X of Gugeri ST/Bayview TCE
6. X of Alfred RD/Servetus ST
7. X of Avion WY/Stirling HWY

I've adjusted the dump locations to better facilitate the values and parameters of the formula and create something visually workable.

Yep no worries, give me the coordinates and I'll process them. Not sure I understand the dump locations being adjusted though....

 

[Peter Kurten]

I've done that here for a few reasons, mainly experimental. Of course we don't know the actual route taken but there were only choices of a few.

1. Routes and route-points themselves can be "chosen locations" for the purposes of geographical processing especially with outlier locations.
2. The closer adjusted locations increases the salience of the north south skew of the known dump locations relative to the local area.
3. Allows us to convert it to a "hyrbrid" jeopardy surface to see if any interesting sort of anchor points pop up. Of course we aren't relying on this but no one said we couldn't experiment.


1. -31.978534, 115.786477
2. -31.972150, 115.8000923
3. -31.984015, 115.777953
4. -31.994152, 115.765720
5. -31.981292, 115.781182
6. -31.971142, 115.766909
7. -31.983917, 115.779209

 

[Peter Kurten]

Papertrail, are you still on this thread ?