Australia Claremont Serial Killer, 1996 - 1997, Perth, Western Australia - #3

[Bartholemeus]

Because the last time she was seen was outside; it's that simple. They 'failed to mention she had been back inside' because the whole point of the CIA doc was to ID the last person seen with JR outside the Conti; it's that simple again. I'm still cross checking the CIA timeline data however I am positive the date stamp on the inside frame will be just after midnight.

So you're saying police didn't release this info because it's not relevant? That would make sense if that was JR in that inside footage. So why are we talking about it as if it's a revelation?

One of the strange things, is the police didn't include in the CIA doc, the footage of Jane and her friends returning to the Conti area. They included footage of them exiting the Conti, mulling around a pole and chatting to a guy who was positioned on the other side of the pole (conveniently out of view from CCTV footage);

Sounds like you have some footage none of us have ever seen before? Any chance you can post it?

 

[papertrail]

This is what I see:

Just as I couldn't fathom how you saw a pedestrian underpass in 1995 Landgate maps, I can't fathom how you can see a a long sleeve shirt and a black jacket. It wouldn't be the first time you have misinterpreted because it fits your story.

I do wish you could discuss things without your attitude which is getting rather noxious. I never said I could see a pedestrian underpass int he 1995 aerial shot lol. I have NOT misinterpreted anything to fit any story. Its a fact you will see later today you obviously don't possess a large monitor to view things on

 

[papertrail]

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=84190&stc=1
[/QUOTE] [B]there is a sleeve where you say there is no sleeve. [/b]

 

[Bartholemeus]

read what I have been writing today and take in a very big cupful of patience.

Ok. So let's assume JR and MM are inside - after we see MM approach her outside but before JR goes back outside.

What's the relevance? Could it change anything from the way we are seeing it?

 

[enzeder]

good job whoever enhanced that footage.

the thing is, you've enhanced the image where it's just the back of his head.

if you are able to do it one second later there are moments where his face is actually side on when talking to JR as he's extending his arms.

maybe you can also enhance that still?

I tried but his facial features kind of blend in with the pale background, as you can see in the first capture, and the following two enhancements aren't much better.

Screen shot from Sunday Night programme.

Video SN: The Claremont Killer - part one, 15:38 mins
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/28295405/father-will-never-give-up-search-for-sarah-spiers/
Video SN: The Claremont Killer - part two, 11:23 mins
https://uk.screen.yahoo.com/claremont-killer-part-two-104500351.html

 

[enzeder]

papertrail, I did attempt to get a clearer view of the 'inside the Conti' frame but wasn't successful sorry. I tried to make out what was going on with the left hand thing but can't make out if he is holding something or just has his hand up to his face?. First capture original and following two are enhanced.

Screen shot from the 1:08 CCTV video (for link see my post #34 ^)

 

[Bartholemeus]

We don't know that.

If you look at the image from a distance he does have the stance of someone taking a picture. But neither girl is posing for a photo. He could be just taking a pic of the girl who potentially just walked down the stairs.

Whilst it looks like MM and I can't see any reason to rule it out based on the photo, a few things don't add up. Namely;

1. If he's taking a consented photo then it's likely people know him. Therefore police know his identity. That means police had to contact him and say "hey buddy, can we use your image as an excuse to release new information that is a red herring in order to get a suspect's mug on TV". Stranger things have happened. Possible but unlikely.

2. If he's either taking a photo not consented to, or a photo consented to and he's unknown to the girls, then they'd have identikits on him. They likely would have released these with the footage and info like "do you know someone who was carrying a camera out that night? He might have been to a function, cruise, family gathering etc"

It certainly looks like MM but there's a lot of dudes wearing jeans and a light coloured shirt. There's enough doubt for me to lean towards it not being him.

 

[Sutton]

I just spent three hours in Gimp trying to clean up the MM photos. No real improvements. I did get some work done un-blurring my Big Foot photos.

Seriously, the software is fun, but there are thousands of options, it needs someone with lots of time on their hands (understanding what each term even means could take hours).

I'll keep working at it. Mine are not as good as the ones Enzeder just posted, and we still cannot make out facial features or the timestamp in those.

I thought Lynda said on the CIA that dancing was upstairs. Are the peeps in the stairway pic just getting making their way toward the door or finishing last drinks? Would people have still been upstairs at this time (assuming it's midnight-ish) Not that it matters...just curious, I guess.

 

[Parkie]

CSK was not dancing. Just taking a pic with a prospective victim & am sad at saying that. There is footage the cops are not addressing... :/

 

[enzeder]

June 12, 2009: Claremont killer video draws blank
Read more: https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/5805237/claremont-killer-video-draws-blank/

Sen. Sgt Nicolau also confirmed police had eliminated from their inquiries an information technology expert they interrogated and placed under surveillance.

The IT expert came to the attention of police when a man reported seeing him as he tried to lure a young woman into his car on Stirling Highway at 2am one Sunday in 2007.

 

[OldDude]

http://www.postnewspapers.com.au/editions/20151114/view.php

Old mate scoop at it again.

 

[Parkie]

The reason that they held onto the MM footage was not so that they didn`t want the public to focus on this one person. It was simply cause they had an idea on what this guy looked like. Coppers would meet up at the Conti for a couple of drinks & look like regular businessmen. They were there to see if he turned up.

 

[Sutton]

The reason that they held onto the MM footage was not so that they didn`t want the public to focus on this one person. It was simply cause they had an idea on what this guy looked like. Coppers would meet up at the Conti for a couple of drinks & look like regular businessmen. They were there to see if he turned up.

This makes perfect sense...for about a year. Surely police weren't waiting incognito at the Conti for 12 years.

Regardless, this is a legitimate explanation for not releasing the tape early on.

IMO, this infers police went to the Conti every night or checked the CCTV footage every night and MM never showed back up.

 

[Sutton]

http://www.postnewspapers.com.au/editions/20151114/view.php

Snipped. This is pretty big news, even if we don't know if it's connected to the CSK. Mr. Christian had to have gotten this info from the police (unless the girl came to him, which sounds unlikely, IMO). The police must think a connection is possible.

The Cottesloe Hotel is located right next to Rowe Park. I wonder what time the abduction occurred?

Many rapes go unreported (statistics vary). Maybe there were more unreported rapes/attempted rapes. This attacker was quite determined; her screams and near escapes did not deter him.

 

[Sutton]

The article on page 19 is notable for its vagueness. Is the article a plea for those who may know who the student is to come forward?

Here's the detail provided on the person police are trying to identify, all apply to his 1996 lifestyle:
• Student
• Worked in hospitality
• Rented a room in Stirling
• Creepy
• Peeped in his housemate's window
• Drove a Commodore

 

[Bartholemeus]

The reason that they held onto the MM footage was not so that they didn`t want the public to focus on this one person. It was simply cause they had an idea on what this guy looked like. Coppers would meet up at the Conti for a couple of drinks & look like regular businessmen. They were there to see if he turned up.

Is this a theory or are you saying you know this to be true?

 

[Bartholemeus]

This makes perfect sense...for about a year. Surely police weren't waiting incognito at the Conti for 12 years.

Regardless, this is a legitimate explanation for not releasing the tape early on.

IMO, this infers police went to the Conti every night or checked the CCTV footage every night and MM never showed back up.

Highly unlikely IMO. If they had an idea as to what he looked like then they would have either released an identikit to the public or showed the identikit to the people who were at the Conti that night.

The most sensible reason is what police maintain - they didn't want the public rail roaded into thinking the CSK was MM.

 

[Bartholemeus]

The article on page 19 is notable for its vagueness. Is the article a plea for those who may know who the student is to come forward?

Here's the detail provided on the person police are trying to identify, all apply to his 1996 lifestyle:
• Student
• Worked in hospitality
• Rented a room in Stirling
• Creepy
• Peeped in his housemate's window
• Drove a Commodore

Wasn't there a former poster who said he lived on the Hwy and was interviewed and polygraphed? He was a student from memory. Went by the name of Chris Isaac on BF. Don't recall his username on WS.

 

[Sutton]

The Cottesloe Hotel abduction occurred twelve to eighteen months after Julie Cutler's disappearance.

Liam Bartlett reported that police told Julie Cutler's father her disappearance was probably linked to the CSK. But there was never any police confirmation, and no further evidence surfaced publicly. Many believe one of Julie's boyfriends was responsible. I think the Cottesloe Hotel abduction makes it more likely Julie was a CSK victim.

There are obvious similarities, but with so little information, we really can't do anything other than guess.

I have read a lot about Julie Cutler in the past. But I must have just skimmed this article:

'...police found no offender's DNA on the bodies of the two women who have been found, Jane Rimmer and Ciara Glennon.

The bodies were exposed to the elements for too long.

The report says that certain items of clothing remain missing from the murder scenes of both the women whose bodies have been found, Jane Rimmer and Ciara Glennon.

It says police are convinced both women were killed close to where they were abducted, and on the same nights that they were abducted.

They were not murdered where they were found.'

This is the first article I've read that confirmed DNA either way.

http://www.australianmissingpersonsregister.com/JulieCutler.htm

Some articles say Julie disappeared from the Parmelia Hilton and others say the Sheraton Hotel. Does anyone know which is correct?

 

[Sutton]

Wasn't there a former poster who said he lived on the Hwy and was interviewed and polygraphed? He was a student from memory. Went by the name of Chris Isaac on BF. Don't recall his username on WS.

Was he creepy?