Still Missing Australia - Lynette Dawson, 34, Sydney, Jan 1982 *Arrest* #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cliff Hardy said:
It's not hard to call the dogs off. Not hard at all.
Click to expand...
Edited by me ..

It makes one burn. I was stunned, and shocked when I read that, but not surprised.. The 'Runaway Wife' is a huge part of police mythology... ( just going back to Stephanie Scott, for a moment, on the verge of her wedding, goes missing from her school on a Saturday arvo , and immediately, the press float the idea that Steph is a 'Runaway Bride'... heartbreaking and horrible. When it turned out she no more ran away from her beloved Aaron, than she would fly to the moon..and that her death was gruesome and wicked in the extreme )

Dawson's leverage with the local police played very deeply against Lynn, and her family, including her own brother, just awful all round.

And Lynn had no reason to leave her own maternal family. None at all.
 
Trooper said:
Edited by me ..

It makes one burn. I was stunned, and shocked when I read that, but not surprised.. The 'Runaway Wife' is a huge part of police mythology... ( just going back to Stephanie Scott, for a moment, on the verge of her wedding, goes missing from her school on a Saturday arvo , and immediately, the press float the idea that Steph is a 'Runaway Bride'... heartbreaking and horrible. When it turned out she no more ran away from her beloved Aaron, than she would fly to the moon..and that her death was gruesome and wicked in the extreme )

Dawson's leverage with the local police played very deeply against Lynn, and her family, including her own brother, just awful all round.

And Lynn had no reason to leave her own maternal family. None at all.
Click to expand...
You'd love to know what the judge is thinking at this point in proceedings.

Chris Dawson's dirty laundry is all over the courtroom floor and the stench is increasing. But the onus on the prosecution remains 'beyond reasonable doubt.' I wonder in the mind of the judge, how close they are to achieving that?
 
Cliff Hardy said:
7news.com.au

Murder probe halted by Lyn Dawson sighting

A possible sighting of Lynette Dawson after her 1982 disappearance led to police suspending their homicide investigation over a decade later.
7news.com.au 7news.com.au

A homicide investigation into the 1982 disappearance of Lynette Dawson was called off because police could not disprove claims she had been seen alive and well afterwards.

"I raised the issue of witness testimony and statements of the police that Lynette Dawson had been seen a week after her supposed disappearance, and I was advised that unless we could refute that evidence, the investigation probably shouldn't proceed," he said.

WOW!

It's not hard to call the dogs off. Not hard at all.
Click to expand...
And he doesn't know whether it was the coroner or the DPP. But isn't it a possible interpretation of what he was allegedly told, that the next thing the investigation needs to do is refute the evidence of the sightings? How would you do that except by continuing the investigation?
 
okie dokie....

so........

Mr Mayger was part of the major crime squad located at Chatswood, Sydney. He examined the January 1982 disappearance of Mrs Dawson in the early 1990s
Giving evidence in the murder trial of Christopher Michael Dawson on Tuesday, former Detective Sergeant Paul Mayger said the investigation was suspended in May 1992 after discussions with either the coroner or Director of Public Prosecutions.

So...which was it???the coroner or the DPP????? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


I raised the issue of witness testimony and statements of the police that Lynette Dawson had been seen a week after her supposed disappearance, and I was advised that unless we could refute that evidence, the investigation probably shouldn’t proceed,” he said.

Mr Mayger said he had not spoken to the Butlins during the investigation.(eyewitness)

OH....DEAR....LORD....

Lets repeat that for the skim readers...
Mr Mayger said he had not spoken to the Butlins during the investigation.

Detective out of 'cereal box' aka Mayger NEVER chased up the lead that would keep Lyns case alive.

smh
 
Cliff Hardy said:
You'd love to know what the judge is thinking at this point in proceedings.

Chris Dawson's dirty laundry is all over the courtroom floor and the stench is increasing. But the onus on the prosecution remains 'beyond reasonable doubt.' I wonder in the mind of the judge, how close they are to achieving that?
Click to expand...
The clock is ticking for CD. Bring it on! And the “alleged” carnal knowledge charges from 2019.
Is CD‘s narcissism a case of nature or nurture?
I would love to know what CD is thinking at this time also. I think he would be surprised how much Lyn shared to family and friends about his actions.
 

From the article: "Mr Mayger could not remember seeing an antecedent report from August 1982 in which Dawson claimed transactions had been made with his wife’s bank card at Katie’s and Just Jeans in the weeks after her disappearance.

“If that information is correct, it only shows that her card was used, not who used it,” he told the court.

~~~
Mr Mayger isn't completely correct. In 1982, credit card purchases required signatures on a three layer receipt. One layer was given to the customer, one stayed with the store, and one went to the bank.

If the use of the card had been investigated in the days after her disappearance, police may have been able to determine if the signature was Lyn's or a forgery.

In addition, the police may have been able to determine if the clothing and jeans purchases were items that would fit Lyn, or instead, a young teen. If I recall correctly, items purchased would be listed on the signed credit card receipt.
 
Last edited:
Cliff Hardy said:
7news.com.au

Murder probe halted by Lyn Dawson sighting

A possible sighting of Lynette Dawson after her 1982 disappearance led to police suspending their homicide investigation over a decade later.
7news.com.au 7news.com.au

A homicide investigation into the 1982 disappearance of Lynette Dawson was called off because police could not disprove claims she had been seen alive and well afterwards.

"I raised the issue of witness testimony and statements of the police that Lynette Dawson had been seen a week after her supposed disappearance, and I was advised that unless we could refute that evidence, the investigation probably shouldn't proceed," he said.

WOW!

It's not hard to call the dogs off. Not hard at all.
Click to expand...

So police believe that Sue Butlin that saw Lyn get into a car and driving off 2 weeks after she "left" despite the fact Lyn didn't have a licence.

"Earlier this month, Mr Butlin told Justice Ian Harrison that his wife had briefly seen Mrs Dawson at a fruit stall on the Pacific Highway north of Sydney before she got into a car and drove off."

In the 2003 inquest he said his wife liked to be the centre of the action. Never said this in the current trial.

Women with the quality and integrity of Lyn don't arrange surprise birthdays for their mum, get their child ready for school and get sketches commissioned of their kids and then leave.

Lyn I imagine would not go shopping if the kids were going to be unsupervised for a number of hours at the pool.
 
Last edited:
DRT said:
So police believe that Sue Butlin that saw Lyn get into a car and driving off 2 weeks after she "left" despite the fact Lyn didn't have a licence.

"Earlier this month, Mr Butlin told Justice Ian Harrison that his wife had briefly seen Mrs Dawson at a fruit stall on the Pacific Highway north of Sydney before she got into a car and drove off."

In the 2003 inquest he said his wife liked to be the centre of the action. Never said this in the current trial.

Women with the quality and integrity of Lyn don't arrange surprise birthdays for their mum, get their child ready for school and get sketches commissioned of their kids and then leave.

Lyn I imagine would not go shopping if the kids were going to be unsupervised for a number of hours at the pool.
Click to expand...
This sighting should have been put to bed years ago.

If Mayger did his actual job back then and interviewed them that is.
 
k-mac said:
This sighting should have been put to bed years ago.

If Mayger did his actual job back then and interviewed them that is.
Click to expand...
Chris never said to anyone. It's not Lyn. Lyn doesn't drive. Instead he added it as supporting his claim. Keeping the false hope in the Simms family. Lyn is at the Central Coast. In between shopping trips in Sydney using her credit card after giving up her job. Why did she stop using her credit card? All too convenient.
 
Is there any actual evidence the bankcard was used after Jan 8th ? Or was it just CD saying it was used? Not that it matters because everyone knows it was not Lyn using it. Just as everyone knows there were never any actual sightings of Lyn after Jan 8th. I wonder how many of the Dawson's actually know the truth of what happenned to Lyn. Surely there must be one amongst them with some moral decency. I would imagine living with the guilt of lying about what happenned to Lyn would be very heavy on any decent persons shoulders. Just thinking out loud !
 
If there was evidence that Lyn was sighted in say Darwin then i would be more inclined to believe that over the current alleged sightings.

The effort Lyn would have needed to go to in order to conceal her identity over all the years does not fit with her residing somewhere reasonably local to where she once lived.
MOO...
 
Last edited:
Podcast Tragic said:
Is there any actual evidence the bankcard was used after Jan 8th ? Or was it just CD saying it was used? Not that it matters because everyone knows it was not Lyn using it. Just as everyone knows there were never any actual sightings of Lyn after Jan 8th. I wonder how many of the Dawson's actually know the truth of what happenned to Lyn. Surely there must be one amongst them with some moral decency. I would imagine living with the guilt of lying about what happenned to Lyn would be very heavy on any decent persons shoulders. Just thinking out loud !
Click to expand...
There had been no evidence produced in the 2003 inquest. The witness from the child care centre had opened the statement so there is confirmation that a statement existed but she had no recollection if there was any items that were purchased after 8 January. She felt quite embarrassed that she had opened it. I think someone would remember if there had been items on the statement after 8 January.

So as to the evidence so far for a statement it is non-existent in its use after Lynette's disappearance. There is mention of it in Helena Simm's diaries but I would expect this is hearsay from Chris.
 

The court was told on Wednesday that three nurses who were employed at the Curl Curl hospital during that period said they had never seen Ms Dawson, who was a registered nurse, working there.

One of the witnesses had come forward via Crime Stoppers as a result of media coverage during the trial, with police obtaining statements from three nurses as a result.

The court was told that one of the witnesses was set to say that she knew Ms Dawson and had never seen her working at Rockcastle.

However, Mr Dawson’s defence argued that the three witnesses should not be allowed to give evidence because it puts them at a forensic disadvantage due to the late stage that they had come forward.
 
Morrisa said:

The court was told on Wednesday that three nurses who were employed at the Curl Curl hospital during that period said they had never seen Ms Dawson, who was a registered nurse, working there.

One of the witnesses had come forward via Crime Stoppers as a result of media coverage during the trial, with police obtaining statements from three nurses as a result.

The court was told that one of the witnesses was set to say that she knew Ms Dawson and had never seen her working at Rockcastle.

However, Mr Dawson’s defence argued that the three witnesses should not be allowed to give evidence because it puts them at a forensic disadvantage due to the late stage that they had come forward.
Click to expand...
I've said this a couple of times that other people not coming up and saying they have seen Lyn at the hospitals is very telling that perhaps it was not Lyn they saw. Not to say that people have made up what they believe they have seen. It is easier to prove that something is there rather than not.

Surely the best outcome of this trial would be to find out if Lyn was alive, most of us see this extremely unlikely.
The best way to refute a sighting of Lyn dressed in a hospital as a nurse is to have other nurses show that or for the person that looked like Lyn to come forward. If she wasn't hiding then she must be using some other name.

The other interesting thing that I heard in the Teachers Trial Podcast was that Lyn used contact lenses. She had a credit with an Optometrist which her mother cancellled after she didn't show with her appointment. Witnesses have said that she was wearing her glasses which may not have been the case.
 
Last edited:
DRT said:
I've said this a couple of times that other people not coming up and saying they have seen Lyn at the hospitals is very telling that perhaps it was not Lyn they saw. Not to say that people have made up what they believe they have seen. It is easier to prove that something is there rather than not.

Surely the best outcome of this trial would be to find out if Lyn was alive, most of us see this extremely unlikely.
The best way to refute a sighting of Lyn dressed in a hospital as a nurse is to have other nurses show that or for the person that looked like Lyn to come forward. If she wasn't hiding then she must be using some other name.
Click to expand...
Yes, spot on @DRT
It's very possible the witnesses that have alleged to have seen Lyn are telling the truth...
...that they think they've spotted Lyn in a crowd, at a hospital in a uniform and also driving past her on a busy street...

...whether they actually saw Lyn... who knows? The Judge certainly won't...
 
Last edited:
Morrisa said:

The court was told on Wednesday that three nurses who were employed at the Curl Curl hospital during that period said they had never seen Ms Dawson, who was a registered nurse, working there.

One of the witnesses had come forward via Crime Stoppers as a result of media coverage during the trial, with police obtaining statements from three nurses as a result.

The court was told that one of the witnesses was set to say that she knew Ms Dawson and had never seen her working at Rockcastle.

However, Mr Dawson’s defence argued that the three witnesses should not be allowed to give evidence because it puts them at a forensic disadvantage due to the late stage that they had come forward.
Click to expand...
I googled Rockcastle Hospital and found a book written by a founder of the new hospital who bought the place. In the book she said that the old hospital was extended in the 70s and had 47 beds in 1992 when she found it. Love and Addiction

Don't know the nurse to patient ratio in 1984 when 'Lyn' was spotted... But for such a small facility, if there were 10 nurses around at any one time, it would be pretty good.

So the Crown has found 3 nurses able to testify they never knew a nurse there who could be Lyn. What is the chance that all three of them just happened not to run into her? The answer should be obvious.

Of course the court has to hear their evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 101 more.
Total: 541 (members: 102, guests: 439)

Online statistics

Members online
102
Guests online
439
Total visitors
541
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,253
Messages
18,236,879
Members
234,325
Latest member
davenotwayne
Back
Top