Australia Claremont Serial Killer, 1996 - 1997, Perth, Western Australia - #6

[MyLeftFoot]

If they have a full DNA profile, then why haven't they made an arrest?

Mo Joe..It's not as simple as that. This doesn't end just because of an arrest. If you could grasp the enormity of getting a felon convicted, you'd have a better understanding just what work has to go into this.
DNA is a very significant tool but it's not the be all and end all unfortunately. Fast forward to a court case...what's the chance of getting it before a jury?....Next to none! It's had so much publicity, I think the culprit will opt for a judge only trial. Juries are easy to sway with DNA..not so a judge.

 

[Mo Joe]

I doubt he would post or read the comments.

 

[MyLeftFoot]

I doubt he would post or read the comments.

I don't

 

[Mo Joe]

Mo Joe..It's not as simple as that. This doesn't end just because of an arrest. If you could grasp the enormity of getting a felon convicted, you'd have a better understanding just what work has to go into this.
DNA is a very significant tool but it's not the be all and end all unfortunately. Fast forward to a court case...what's the chance of getting it before a jury?....Next to none! It's had so much publicity, I think the culprit will opt for a judge only trial. Juries are easy to sway with DNA..not so a judge.

There is the possibility that if presented with enough evidence the culprit might confess.

 

[Mo Joe]

I don't

That would be more evidence against him. MOO

 

[MyLeftFoot]

There is the possibility that if presented with enough evidence the culprit might confess.

I agree..but it would have to be so convincing that he would have to know the game is well n truly up! Perhaps invetigators are just busy connecting the dots for that very purpose.

 

[Mo Joe]

Mo Joe..It's not as simple as that. This doesn't end just because of an arrest. If you could grasp the enormity of getting a felon convicted, you'd have a better understanding just what work has to go into this.
DNA is a very significant tool but it's not the be all and end all unfortunately. Fast forward to a court case...what's the chance of getting it before a jury?....Next to none! It's had so much publicity, I think the culprit will opt for a judge only trial. Juries are easy to sway with DNA..not so a judge.

How many murder charges are successfully prosecuted? I know LR got off but I expected that.

 

[Mo Joe]

I agree..but it would have to be so convincing that he would have to know the game is well n truly up! Perhaps invetigators are just busy connecting the dots for that very purpose.

They have allegedly been connecting the dots and crossing the t's and dotting the i's for years, haven't they?

 

[Mo Joe]

There is the possibility that if presented with enough evidence the culprit might confess.

After all, isn't it part of their game that they be famous?

 

[meticulously]

David Masters has been incarcerated since June 1991, so he's ruled out for the CSK assaults. He might be good for Sally Greenham, though. I'm not sure if that's what you're suggesting. I would be interested to read details about her disappearance.

Article
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi sutton nope aren't suggesting anything at all regarding masters & sally greenham its just that was "key word" to find it on googsearch . thought he was in the time frame for at least some of the attacks in the area & he looks a bit like (2) artist sketches of the time , it could be that he committed one of the unsolved sex crimes thus by default contributing to the id kit face . seeing the usual suspects have been scrutinized , why not look further down the list of pois ? Poi D.m. moved lots of places around aust . Will check the dates again.
That top half face id kit is partly unexplained & may well be from a culmination of (one ) or MoRE , non fatal assaults .
masters , ainsworth & dixies faces fit the best with that face match. It may not be the "csk" but it may fit a piece of a jigsaw puzzle and therefore eliminate somethings as well. The way im looking at this is moreso from the foundations up rather than going for the crown jewel, fitting the development stages with the correct perp & MOs . Also trying to clear up the confusing amount of different coloured panel vans in the 70s-80s reported for abductions & when did the rumours of panel vans cease and the csk pickup vehicles of the commodore / taxi changeover ? Let me know if there's anything to do with archives of msm clips or pictures you would like to have edited for clarity

layout app for photos

 

[Bartholemeus]

Just to give you a fresh perspective..Stanbury wasn't demoted..he was shifted to forensics. That might tell you something.

That sounds unlikely IMO. What you're trying to say is;

They discovered DNA so for the next phase of the CSK they switched the Head of Macro to forensics? Forensics don't investigate or decide who to test. They just test and provide results on the request of various departments.

Do you have a source for this because it would surprise me greatly.

 

[Bartholemeus]

I agree..but it would have to be so convincing that he would have to know the game is well n truly up! Perhaps invetigators are just busy connecting the dots for that very purpose.

I'd suggest if you presented the suspect with his DNA it wouldn't be that hard to convince him the gig is up. Failing that, they'd be quite sure they have their man and would be building a case. Search warrants, alibis etc.

 

[Bartholemeus]

It might tell you that they now have a full DNA profile

If they have a full DNA sample that matches both KK and CG then when they find a match it's a slam dunk. There would be know way a POI could explain his DNA being on two different crime scene victims.

I'm not seeing the activity I would expect if they had a full DNA profile. They've just moved the head of Macro off the case. That's not unusual in itself but they haven't appointed a successor. They haven't thrown a good resource at it. And they haven't made an effort to build their POI list - at this stage the best way to do that is a public campaign.

 

[Mo Joe]

Lisa Jane Brown 1998. Dressed like Nicole Reid. Why isn't Lisa Jane Brown mentioned more in CSK discussions? Why isn't Lisa Jane Brown getting the attention of the other girls. Perhaps he moved areas when Claremont got too hot?

 

[Mo Joe]

If they have a full DNA sample that matches both KK and CG then when they find a match it's a slam dunk. There would be know way a POI could explain his DNA being on two different crime scene victims.

I'm not seeing the activity I would expect if they had a full DNA profile. They've just moved the head of Macro off the case. That's not unusual in itself but they haven't appointed a successor. They haven't thrown a good resource at it. And they haven't made an effort to build their POI list - at this stage the best way to do that is a public campaign.

Are you saying that no-one is heading Macro?

 

[Bartholemeus]

She's possible as are some other girls. One thing we can be quite confident of is; if the CSK remained in Australia and continued killing then he changed his MO.

My gut feel is DM did Lisa Brown. I haven't ruled out the CSK but without any extra evidence it's in the "will keep it in mind won't look at it unless there's some new evidence or a plausible theory" basket.

 

[MyLeftFoot]

That sounds unlikely IMO. What you're trying to say is;

They discovered DNA so for the next phase of the CSK they switched the Head of Macro to forensics? Forensics don't investigate or decide who to test. They just test and provide results on the request of various departments.

Do you have a source for this because it would surprise me greatly.

My first reaction is oh duh!..of course forensics don't decide who to test! But they do...Surely what you are implying is that forensic scientists don't decide who to test?
And yes I can provide a source. I'll do this later as I will need to compile it for easy reading.

When you read it sequentially, you will see that having a full profile will explain a lot.

 

[Bartholemeus]

Are you saying that no-one is heading Macro?

Hard to say. My guess is there's a team working within SCS that report to the head of SCS rather than a dedicated Macro team leader.

Does anyone have any insight into this?

 

[Bartholemeus]

My first reaction is oh duh!..of course forensics don't decide who to test! But they do...Surely what you are implying is that forensic scientists don't decide who to test?
And yes I can provide a source. I'll do this later as I will need to compile it for easy reading.

It's a laboratory. They are scientists. Let's take the CSK case for example. Someone calls crime stoppers and reports a lead. Invesigators run some checks and realise this person's name has come up a few times and is on their POI list. The new information elevates them up the POI list. Forensics would not have access to the CSK case files. They would not be the team looking at suspects, investigating them and then deciding "we should go and ask/demand for that POI's DNA".

ps CSI: Las Vegas isn't actually real. Doesn't happen like that.

 

[MyLeftFoot]

Hard to say. My guess is there's a team working within SCS that report to the head of SCS rather than a dedicated Macro team leader.

Does anyone have any insight into this?

Yes I do. Major Crime is essentially handling the case..with SCS a smaller sub group in regard to this investigation. So in essence, where staff have been moved, they only moved sideways into MC. Resources have been placed where they are most productive.