- Dec 27, 2016
- 29,797
- 62,376
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
dunno, isnt that the infrared sensor? separate to the lens/camera? Does it shoot out a little laser and detect the reflection or not? Would it not be a collimated beam and not require focusing, and doesn't relate to the camera focal depth directly?If that's the case then how did it get activated via the family car? Did they park their car under the porch of shack 28?
Well it wasn't close by right in open view if he sat there long enough for everyone to go back to sleep now would it, or it might have been seen and linked to his impending abduction.
If he was there for camping or fishing wouldnt he have been included in the list of people in the vicinity at the time or mentioned as having been there and then not by others?It's possible he was there for camping or fishing.
On a certain part of his lower anatomy would be perfectIt's a shame it wasn't a drum or more of acid
Very interesting. Looking for what in the camp fire pits? A burnt sleeping bag or clothing items? Beer cans? Cigarette butts?
The picture of the guy thats being painted here in order to fit him into the perfect crime leads me to believe he would have measured his distances to the nearest millimeter so as to A/ avoid detection and B/ avoid any uprisings.And further away to give Cleo more opportunity to fight or scream or escape?
Certainly the last two - gathering more DNA I’d imagine, just in case they uncover DNA which doesn’t match the samples they took from departing campers.
And if the early 90s Ford Falcon that popped up on that mine site HSE poster is their car maybe their even less likely of owning a mobile.... Old school? Hermit?
A 2nd CCTV camera from No. 28?Looking for what in the camp fire pits? A burnt sleeping bag or clothing items? Beer cans? Cigarette butts?
What you have said has some components of the theory I favour. Which is that one person who knows the area well abducts Cleo and takes her to an isolated location nearby where they feel safe/are confident they won’t get caught. I don’t think they would risk traveling too far due to the risk of being more conspicuous with every car/person you pass, but it would be far enough so evidence is not easily located. They would want to be at the location under cover of darkness. So I think 1-2 hours away. Easily doable on a tank of fuel presuming it was relatively full whenever they left to go to the campsite.The suggestion/speculation that this was undertaken by an opportunistic petty thief as a sudden/second choice is hard to fathom and frankly seems implausible. As I suggested in an earlier post, what does the perpetrator do then - take her to cash convertors..?
More likely there was a level of planning undertaken, that involves two perpetrators. A snatcher and a driver, and the car witnessed leaving the area, to be verified, also supports this.
Moreover, unless they have pre-organized extra fuel and provisions and driven into the bush/outback, which is quite plausible yet somehow being ignored (publicly anyway), depending on how far and where they have gone, it's likely and a tragic reality that none of them have/will survive..!
View attachment 1268955
Terrifying.
A 2nd CCTV camera from No. 28?
If he was there for camping or fishing wouldnt he have been included in the list of people in the vicinity at the time or mentioned as having been there and then not by others?
You reckon after 12 days with a child still missing they wouldn't have already tracked down any person they know to have been there?It's very possible he's one of the people police have identified as being at the site but have not been interviewed.
What you have said has some components of the theory I favour. Which is that one person who knows the area well abducts Cleo and takes her to an isolated location nearby where they feel safe/are confident they won’t get caught. I don’t think they would risk traveling too far due to the risk of being more conspicuous with every car/person you pass, but it would be far enough so evidence is not easily located. They would want to be at the location under cover of darkness. So I think 1-2 hours away. Easily doable on a tank of fuel presuming it was relatively full whenever they left to go to the campsite.
I think it will be an isolated bush camp, or simply a spot they know. I don’t think they’d take her to their house, because there’s always a chance that evidence will be found at some point, especially if they are pursued as a POI.
I genuinely don’t think this person has just gotten lucky in getting away with it. I think they’ve been meticulously careful. Opportunistic to a degree: I think it’s something they’ve been fantasizing about and therefore a lot of the general planning had been done and it was just a matter of putting the specifics together in this case when they saw the chance with Cleo. I’d hazard a guess this person has skulked around a lot of campsites.
Lol after the interview right?!
You reckon after 12 days with a child still missing they wouldn't have already tracked down any person they know to have been there?
At 6.30pm when they’re tired and getting settled in? Any pics would have been planned for the following day.In terms of if there's evidence of Cleo being at campsite - in second interview parents did, they mention they haven't been camping since Isla was born and that it's the kids first camping trip together.
I find it hard to think she wouldn't have taken a photo soon after arriving of the kids together. Especially if they have a very active social media presence.
I've given up on the hope of there being a 2nd CCTV camera at No. 28.
The guy that owns No. 28 is having a fight with the council who want to tear his shack down so I reckon he's only got enough of a view to see any officials cars pull up and to eavesdrop on their convos. He also spent between $600 and $800 on that one cam, two and he's starting to look really paranoid.
Me too. I think I recall reading that the Council was keeping the campsite closed, but regardless there is risk of contamination and degradation out in the elements. I can’t see how they will be able to find something of relevance now, let alone use it as evidence. And I would have thought they’d do that immediately to give themselves the best chance of establishing who was there.I'm struggling with police only today collecting ash from campfires, days after her disappearance and days after the campgrounds were reopened?!?!
You reckon after 12 days with a child still missing they wouldn't have already tracked down any person they know to have been there?