Clinton David Brink, 43 & Cristen Amanda Brink, 41 found on trail - Devil's Den State Park, AR- 26 July, 2025 #3 *Arrest*

[AngTxGal]

I find it hard to believe he would be thinking he'd abduct not one but two children in a popular park while his car was somewhat far away? The method of choice being a knife also doesn't really fit well in getting the victims to comply. It's a lot more personal and they can always just run away.

He killed two adults, I’m convinced he was capable of also killing one of the girls.
Then he could carry a 40 lb child sedated in the duffle bag to his car- about 1/2 a mile away.

I assume he brought that huge duffle bag for a reason. The only reason that seems logical to me, considering all of the other information we have, is to carry a child.

I’d like to know what was in his backpack, and what was in the duffle bag.
Did he have a sedative? Duct tape? Rope?
What images are on his phone?

I could very well be wrong, but so far I can’t rule this out and do not see evidence for another explanation. As time passes the evidence for his inappropriate behavior with little girls has become even more supported. How could that drive not be related to this crime?

He has designed his life and career to put him in the paths of children every day.

Do I feel there is some sort of conspiracy taking place among these parents coming forward to the press claiming he was inappropriate with kids? I do not
Take a look at any YouTube video from a reputable source that describes how an adult male grooms a child over time. He was doing exactly what a pedo groomer does

IMO

 

[Hexe]

I clearly say may, I did not say have to.
I didn’t say the kids were targets of murder, I think he wanted to kidnap one of them.
Is there anything in his history that screams red flags for random murder of an entire family? No

There are though red flags about his anger issues.

Is there evidence in his history that supports he desired to have an inappropriate relationship with a female child the age of the Brink’s daughters? Yes

The parents though did not know his history. The parents saw a man who suddenly attacked Mr Brink (not the girls) so they did all they could to allow their children escape away. So yes, they died protecting their children, as the media wrote, but that expression does not imply children were McGann's targets.

Also, considering he initially focused on Mr Brink, attacking him without any previous interaction, makes me doubt he wanted to kidnap a child. Attacking an adult first makes a lot of noise and gives the children time to escape. It would be much more efficient to use some ruse to get a child away from the caregivers, don't you think?

 

[AngTxGal]

There are though red flags about his anger issues.


The parents though did not know his history. The parents saw a man who suddenly attacked Mr Brink (not the girls) so they did all they could to allow their children escape away. So yes, they died protecting their children, as the media wrote, but that expression does not imply children were McGann's targets.

Also, considering he initially focused on Mr Brink, attacking him without any previous interaction, makes me doubt he wanted to kidnap a child. Attacking an adult first makes a lot of noise and gives the children time to escape. It would be much more efficient to use some ruse to get a child away from the caregivers, don't you think?

Yes, I agree that there are other ways to kidnap a child, and there is evidence he got angry.
His past guides us to his present and he has zero complaints from anyone about unchecked anger.

There have been no anger fueled interactions with a peer teacher, parents, or boss in the press.

We do know these things-
- None of his contracts were renewed.
- Parents complained and he was put on admin leave.
- Those complaints were due to patterns of behavior that look like grooming. Some parents even used the word- grooming.
- He avoided parents, had not dating success, didn’t socialize with other teachers.

If he planned to take one of the girls and then encountered the parents, he would first take out the persons who keep preventing him from having access to children- Their Parents.

I’m not saying he was skilled or that he is smart or that this well thought out plan- Clearly it wasn’t.
What I am saying is I think he was hunting for a parent with a female child he was attracted to, and he planned to take a child.

If his choice has been different- one parent with a child- and he had not made a spectacle of his car leaving the park. And then a parent’s body is found days later… and it is noted that that person entered the park with a child…
He may have been successful.

How long was he out there, did he arrive at 9AM and had been in that hot clothing for five or six hours? Maybe he simply lost his patience? And attacked rather than quit?

Why are so many attributing high levels of planning and intelligence to this guy when we know his actions during and after do not show high levels of planning or intelligence??

Seems clear to me- A pedo who wanted to kidnap a little girl, and her parents got in the way.

What if the little girls told LE- He jumped out of the woods and grabbed my arm. And I jerked away, then Dad stepped up and he stabbed him in the chest.
Would that make a difference? Is this not possible? It does’t have to be true- but it is possible.

IMO

 

[Hexe]

Yes, I agree that there are other ways to kidnap a child, and evidence of anger issues.
His past guides us to his present and he has zero complaints from anyone about bar fights, assaults, bullying- so far.
No anger fueled interactions with a peer teacher, parents, or boss.

Which means a lot of repressed anger. Maybe killing strangers was McGann's way of releasing that steam?

We do know none of his contracts were renewed.
We also know that parents complained and he was put on admin leave.
We also know he avoided parents, women his own age, didn’t socialize with peers.

If he planned to take one of the girls, he would first take out the persons who keep preventing him from having access to children- Their Parents.

That is the riskiest way of kidnapping a child. Why not using a ruse to get the intended victim away? He is fully capable of being nice and likeable towards the children.

Another thing, why would he kidnap a child at all, when he got yet another teaching job with free access to the children?

 

[AngTxGal]

Which means a lot of repressed anger. Maybe killing strangers was McGann's way of releasing that steam?



That is the riskiest way of kidnapping a child. Why not using a ruse to get the intended victim away? He is fully capable of being nice and likeable towards the children.

Another thing, why would he kidnap a child at all, when he got yet another teaching job with free access to the children?

Where is there evidence this guy had any high level skills of kidnapping?
Where is there evidence he had planned and successfully carried out a murder and not gotten caught?

You don’t have to convince me he wasn’t good at it, what he did and the result is pretty clear evidence.
He was not good at being a murderer or a kidnapper, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t try.

Maybe he had been thinking about it, just woke up on a weekend and said,
“I need a fix, I can’t wait any longer, I’m gonna do this!”

IMO

 

[AngTxGal]

Which means a lot of repressed anger. Maybe killing strangers was McGann's way of releasing that steam?



That is the riskiest way of kidnapping a child. Why not using a ruse to get the intended victim away? He is fully capable of being nice and likeable towards the children.

Another thing, why would he kidnap a child at all, when he got yet another teaching job with free access to the children?

There is no evidence he was good at murder.
There is no evidence he was good at drawing in kids outside of school.
All parents that have come forward are parents whose child had no choice but to be around him.
None of the parents had kids who met him in a bookstore, a park, a neighborhood, at the mall…

He was a teacher, and kids are culturally trained to trust their teachers.
That was his advantage- he had been trained in how to relate to, sweet talk, reward, manipulate, intimidate, and coerce children- and then put in charge of 20 of them in a room alone.

IMO that is the most egregious betrayal of professional trust on a vulnerable population.
He is not a one off angry reactive brutal killer…

He is a sadistic monster, who was known and not stopped for years, and he thought he was too dam smart, so he thought he could get by with kidnapping.
That is the nature of escalation- the common grows boring and you have to do something exciting, novel, risky.

IMO

 

[indicolite22]

Which means a lot of repressed anger. Maybe killing strangers was McGann's way of releasing that steam?

Why did he pick a family if he wanted to kill an adult? He willfully traumatized the children and ruined their lives (if he didn't plan even worse for them).

That is the riskiest way of kidnapping a child. Why not using a ruse to get the intended victim away? He is fully capable of being nice and likeable towards the children.

I doubt it would have been easy to lure the Brink children away. The parents looked like they would have been aware of the dangers and wouldn't let the children out of sight.

Another thing, why would he kidnap a child at all, when he got yet another teaching job with free access to the children?

Who knows if his plans (fantasies?) stretched beyond what he was getting away with as a teacher.

 

[AngTxGal]

There are though red flags about his anger issues.


The parents though did not know his history. The parents saw a man who suddenly attacked Mr Brink (not the girls) so they did all they could to allow their children escape away. So yes, they died protecting their children, as the media wrote, but that expression does not imply children were McGann's targets.

Also, considering he initially focused on Mr Brink, attacking him without any previous interaction, makes me doubt he wanted to kidnap a child. Attacking an adult first makes a lot of noise and gives the children time to escape. It would be much more efficient to use some ruse to get a child away from the caregivers, don't you think?

We have no idea how that interaction went, we have the piece of little girls’ testimony that LE decided to release to the public. That is it

If someone was dressed like he was, in the woods at a park, stepped out and interacted with my child- I would assume- he is a pedo trying to kidnap or harm my child.
The Brinks didn’t need to know his history- he was dressed like and probably acted like a criminal.

I am not saying he was a bright bulb or a mastermind- clearly he was not.
What I would do if I was a pedo, being brighter than him, and also knowledgeable of human psychology and science, and a true crime hobbiest- Night and day difference.

Why give him all of the skills he clearly does not have?

We do know…
He is in jail, up on death penalty charges. Taken into custody during a haircut having driven his car to the salon- He is no mastermind

IM

 

[Hexe]

Why did he pick a family if he wanted to kill an adult? He willfully traumatized the children and ruined their lives (if he didn't plan even worse for them).

Who says he knew Mr Brink had a family in tow? He might not notice Mrs Brink and the girls in the first moment and then it was too late.

I doubt it would have been easy to lure the Brink children away. The parents looked like they would have been aware of the dangers and wouldn't let the children out of sight.

McGann did not know Brinks, also I do not think Brink girls were the only children on the trail.

 

[Hexe]

We have no idea how that interaction went, we have the piece of little girls’ testimony that LE decided to release to the public. That is it

The LE very clearly stated Mr Brink was ambushed by McGann lying in wait.

 

[Hexe]

There is no evidence he was good at murder.

He butchered two people in broad daylight and managed to escape.

 

[indicolite22]

Who says he knew Mr Brink had a family in tow? He might not notice Mrs Brink and the girls in the first moment and then it was too late.

Why would they not be walking together? Even if so, children are usually not quiet when out and about. The perp probably heard them first.

McGann did not know Brinks, also I do not think Brink girls were the only children on the trail.

He couldn't have stayed in the park for too long and risk being seen by many people. If he didn't want to damage the children, he wouldn't have killed their parents.

 

[Hexe]

Why would they not be walking together?

Million of reasons. One of kids wanted to pee badly. Mom and the kids stayed a bit behind to observe something together. Dad went a bit faster being eager to show kids something that awaited further on the trail.

I looked at Devil's Den trail at Google maps. The trail itself is a narrow path, fringed with lush vegetation, with many curves and turns. Mr Brink would not have to go very far forward for his family not be readily visible behind him

Even if so, children are usually not quiet when out and about. The perp probably heard them first.

Many people teach their kids to not be overly loud in the woods and some kids are quiet by their own nature. Also, speaking from experience of person who for almost half of century lived in and around the woods, sound in woodied areas can make really weird things.

He couldn't have stayed in the park for too long and risk being seen by many people. If he didn't want to damage the children, he wouldn't have killed their parents.

I'd say walking around trail like a normal visitor turns much less attention that slaughtering two adults. If he wanted to get a child why didn't he chose the one with just one adult caregiver?

 

[indicolite22]

If he wanted to get a child why didn't he chose the one with just one adult caregiver?

SBM. IMO he would have done that if he had a chance.

 

[Hexe]

SBM. IMO he would have done that if he had a chance.

Why wouldn't he have a chance of that?

 

[SMK777]

Why wouldn't he have a chance of that?

Maybe he didn't encounter one?

Just further random thoughts:
A state forest like Devil’s Den wouldn't really have any unaccompanied children, so it's an odd place to choose for an abduction. Of course in our era it would be hard to find unaccompanied children anywhere, unlike in former decades. So maybe he was looking for a momentary separation from parents, if in fact abduction was his goal.

 

[PunishThenForgive]

I'd be interested in finding out if there were any flashing incidents or sexual assaults on the trails this dude frequented. I mean the clothing he wore in Devil's Den look less like running outfit and more like something a sex offender would do. Dark clothes to make stains less visible, long sleeves and trousers for protection against scratches and the face cover ready on his neck...

He killed two adults, I’m convinced he was capable of also killing one of the girls.
Then he could carry a 40 lb child sedated in the duffle bag to his car- about 1/2 a mile away.

I assume he brought that huge duffle bag for a reason. The only reason that seems logical to me, considering all of the other information we have, is to carry a child.

I’d like to know what was in his backpack, and what was in the duffle bag.
Did he have a sedative? Duct tape? Rope?
What images are on his phone?

I could very well be wrong, but so far I can’t rule this out and do not see evidence for another explanation. As time passes the evidence for his inappropriate behavior with little girls has become even more supported. How could that drive not be related to this crime?

He has designed his life and career to put him in the paths of children every day.

Do I feel there is some sort of conspiracy taking place among these parents coming forward to the press claiming he was inappropriate with kids? I do not
Take a look at any YouTube video from a reputable source that describes how an adult male grooms a child over time. He was doing exactly what a pedo groomer does

IMO

This guy—this whole case—baffles me. I was shocked when we found out he is an elementary school teacher! How could someone who was just about to start the new school year be so unhinged?

Source for this photo and the next: New Shocking Evidence

I agree, @Hexe, that he did dress like a flasher the day of the murders. He acted like a hunter, though, as he stood on the trail, looking down below.

And why did he carry that huge duffle bag?

Source

The one he carried looks so old and worn. IIRC he used it as a coach, and likely when he was an athlete. Perhaps he didn’t have a backpack, and this was conveniently on hand.

Did he plan to murder a parent that day and simply needed something big enough to stuff his bloody clothes into? Or did he, as @AngTxGal and others suspect, plan to grab a small child?

Finally, why did he “admit” to the crimes, but then plead guilty? According to Frontline:

Arkansas has an insanity defense. Do his attorneys plan to use it?

IMO

 

[SMK777]

This guy—this whole case—baffles me. I was shocked when we found out he is an elementary school teacher! How could someone who was just about to start the new school year be so unhinged?

Snipped for emphasis
Yes, this also baffled me.

 

[Sundog]

Snipped for emphasis
Yes, this also baffled me.

It's possible that the structure of working a job full time helped him keep the monsters at bay, so to speak. With the lack of structure or connections over the summer months, perhaps his mental health deteriorated to the point of no return and his desire to kill took over. He could no longer hold it together. So tragic for the Brink family.

 

[SMK777]

It's possible that the structure of working a job full time helped him keep the monsters at bay, so to speak. With the lack of structure or connections over the summer months, perhaps his mental health deteriorated to the point of no return and his desire to kill took over. He could no longer hold it together. So tragic for the Brink family.

Yes, good observation.