Updated Easey St Murders Collingwood * ARREST MADE

[Worm4]

So, accused was pulled over and was found with a knife which in turn had human blood sample of A positive ( common in 1/3 of humans) which happen to match 1 of the victims. Blood type of victim number 2 must have different as there has been been no reporting of the fact that as to why there wasn't a second blood type found on the knife. I find this quite peculiar. Maybe the knife found in question in the boot of the car isn't the murder weapon at all. The suspects alibi could have been seen as plausible back 47 years ago, hence he wasn't charged .

 

[Longmembrey]

It's more than just highlighting, it's the attitude that if they were a cop at the time then they would of solved the case.

It came across pretty strong when I was catching up on the last 10 pages here, but I didn't meantion it because it seems to happen on every case here.

Oh come on, it doesn't take a super-slueth to know in real time what should have been done a long time ago.

DNA evidence has been used in Australian courts for over 30 years.

Here we have a known crook who had been found with the possible murder weapon, who lived nearby and knew (via school) one of the victims.

Yet, he was able to jump on a plane to Greece in 2017. It is only dumb luck that he is even still alive and flew to Rome. Otherwise, there would never have even been an arrest.

But yeah, only a keyboard warrior could have thought to obtain DNA from this criminal mastermind

 

[jimmytigs]

Anyone think perhaps the DNA puts him at the scene of the crime but perhaps there was a second man too?

very possible,its been said that whoever did this had to be incredibly strong,17yo doesnt fit that,though adrenalin etc will help out,id think every chance there was,but we probably will never know,gives me vibes that he wont be giving anyone up or seeking lesser blame,reckon he will fight it with all he has got,then cop it,mind you im not surprised if the best lawyers in melbourne are lining up to represent him for free right now,he may well get off

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

So, accused was pulled over and was found with a knife which in turn had human blood sample of A positive ( common in 1/3 of humans) which happen to match 1 of the victims. Blood type of victim number 2 must have different as there has been been no reporting of the fact that as to why there wasn't a second blood type found on the knife. I find this quite peculiar. Maybe the knife found in question in the boot of the car isn't the murder weapon at all. The suspects alibi could have been seen as plausible back 47 years ago, hence he wasn't charged .

I believe S.Armstrong's blood type (A+) was found on the knife; S.Bartlett's blood type (O+) wasn't.

The knife had been cleaned (at least attempted to be cleaned), so alone, to me, it could mean several things: from it not being the murder weapon, to two different murder weapons (and perhaps more than one killer), to it being successfully cleaned of one victim's blood, but microscopic specks of the other victim's blood remaining.

I think it should be cleared up though that the knife HAD definitely been cleaned: when Iddles found it, it wasn't looking like it had just been in a slaughterhouse. As far as I'm aware, it's not even clear whether the blood was apparent to the naked eye. It had been cleaned, clearly just not perfectly.

 

[revo333]

Oh come on, it doesn't take a super-slueth to know in real time what should have been done a long time ago.

DNA evidence has been used in Australian courts for over 30 years.

Here we have a known crook who had been found with the possible murder weapon, who lived nearby and knew (via school) one of the victims.

Yet, he was able to jump on a plane to Greece in 2017. It is only dumb luck that he is even still alive and flew to Rome. Otherwise, there would never have even been an arrest.

But yeah, only a keyboard warrior could have thought to obtain DNA from this criminal mastermind

Wasn't expecting someone to blatantly prove my point.

Cheers!

 

[DeliveryProblems]

I believe S.Armstrong's blood type (A+) was found on the knife; S.Bartlett's blood type (O+) wasn't.

The knife had been cleaned (at least attempted to be cleaned), so alone, to me, it could mean several things: from it not being the murder weapon, to two different murder weapons (and perhaps more than one killer), to it being successfully cleaned of one victim's blood, but microscopic specks of the other victim's blood remaining.

I think it should be cleared up though that the knife HAD definitely been cleaned: when Iddles found it, it wasn't looking like it had just been in a slaughterhouse. As far as I'm aware, it's not even clear whether the blood was apparent to the naked eye. It had been cleaned, clearly just not perfectly.

The blood was on the handle of the knife not the blade

 

[GrayRanga]

Oh come on, it doesn't take a super-slueth to know in real time what should have been done a long time ago.

DNA evidence has been used in Australian courts for over 30 years.

Here we have a known crook who had been found with the possible murder weapon, who lived nearby and knew (via school) one of the victims.

Yet, he was able to jump on a plane to Greece in 2017. It is only dumb luck that he is even still alive and flew to Rome. Otherwise, there would never have even been an arrest.

But yeah, only a keyboard warrior could have thought to obtain DNA from this criminal mastermind

The Police State cannot just wander up and down the street asking random people for DNA samples.

Every person has the right to refuse to give a sample for comparison testing.

If a person refuses to undergo a voluntary test, the sample for testing can only be obtained by Court Order, where the Police have to make the case before the Court, using evidence that can be challenged, that the test be undertaken.

That Order can be appealed.

He could have done a runner to Greece whilst the Police were still busy in Court,

How are you going to hold him in custody whilst the Court issues are resolved

How much did a DNA comparison test cost in 1989 (first time used in Australia)?

Cost to the State to DNA test every Crim who lived in Collingwood in the 1970s? (as a percentage of Victoria's GDP?)

How sensitive where the early tests to 12 years old DNA samples which may not have been kept in an ideal environment?

At what date did the Forensic Labs feel comfortable with the results from possibly degraded DNA samples?

Where did the suspect fit in the league table of suspects?

If he was #1, I would suggest that Poice command would have no problems finding the funds for comparison testing in 1989. All Government departments face cost/benefit monitoring either through auditing or Parliament

However if he was #191, command might have waited until the State Government (your taxes) agreed to a Million Dollar reward to test those at the bottom of the table

But CSI resoloves the crime in an hour episode (less commercials).

Unforgotten does is over six episodes

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

I wonder who's car he was driving.

Might have been his own, you don't need a licence to own a car. Or his father's, sister's or he nicked one.

 

[Sqotty from office works]

I wonder who's car he was driving.

That's the part I don't get.
It was my hoon time of life and every copper used excuses to charge you on car offences.
No licence
Unroadworthy vehicle.
It was the easiest way for a cop to get a collar .
He's got him dead under-age driving which gives him a great excuse to search the car and take him to the cop shop for questioning about burglary

 

[DeliveryProblems]

Might have been his own, you don't need a licence to own a car. Or his father's, sisters or he nicked one.

Not many 17yo’s own cars.

 

[Kurve]

I wonder who's car he was driving.

Is it confirmed he was actually driving the car?

Could it have been someone else who when the knife was found in the boot, said that PK put it there? Then PK has come up with the story he found it?

 

[DeliveryProblems]

The Police State cannot just wander up and down the street asking random people for DNA samples.

Every person has the right to refuse to give a sample for comparison testing.

If a person refuses to undergo a voluntary test, the sample for testing can only be obtained by Court Order, where the Police have to make the case before the Court, using evidence that can be challenged, that the test be undertaken.

That Order can be appealed.

He could have done a runner to Greece whilst the Police were still busy in Court,

How are you going to hold him in custody whilst the Court issues are resolved

How much did a DNA comparison test cost in 1989 (first time used in Australia)?

Cost to the State to DNA test every Crim who lived in Collingwood in the 1970s? (as a percentage of Victoria's GDP?)

How sensitive where the early tests to 12 years old DNA samples which may not have been kept in an ideal environment?

At what date did the Forensic Labs feel comfortable with the results from possibly degraded DNA samples?

Where did the suspect fit in the league table of suspects?

If he was #1, I would suggest that Poice command would have no problems finding the funds for comparison testing in 1989. All Government departments face cost/benefit monitoring either through auditing or Parliament

However if he was #191, command might have waited until the State Government (your taxes) agreed to a Million Dollar reward to test those at the bottom of the table

But CSI resoloves the crime in an hour episode (less commercials).

Unforgotten does is over six episodes

So there’s been a double murder with a knife. Everybody’s looking for the offender. A local crim is found with a knife that has human blood on it. Surely he makes the top 10 list of suspects.

 

[Kurve]

So there’s been a double murder with a knife. Everybody’s looking for the offender. A local crim is found with a knife that has human blood on it. Surely he makes the top 10 list of suspects.

The cops had tunnel vision, apparently homicide was convinced Grant the crime reporter was responsible.

Given Grant had an association with Julie Garciacelay who disappeared in 1975, presumed murdered, they probably thought it was too much of a coincidence that now they had two murdered women and he was staying over in the house next door when it happened.

 

[GreyCrow]

How sensitive where the early tests to 12 years old DNA samples which may not have been kept in an ideal environment?

At what date did the Forensic Labs feel comfortable with the results from possibly degraded DNA samples?

I think once Bradley Edwards was convicted using LCN (Low Copy Number) DNA samples is when it moved further forward

 

[GreyCrow]

The cops had tunnel vision, apparently homicide was convinced Grant the crime reporter was responsible.

Given Grant had an association with Julie Garciacelay who disappeared in 1975, presumed murdered, they probably thought it was too much of a coincidence that now they had two murdered women and he was staying over in the house next door when it happened.

He was my top POI given these facts

I even explained how it could have been done ie in jocks and showers when he comes back as if getting up for work

But I was wrong

 

[Kurve]

I think once Bradley Edwards was convicted using LCN (Low Copy Number) DNA samples is when it moved further forward

One vital piece of evidence with DNA on it and collected through his early prowling years, was misfiled and lost for years as well.

 

[GreyCrow]

So there’s been a double murder with a knife. Everybody’s looking for the offender. A local crim is found with a knife that has human blood on it. Surely he makes the top 10 list of suspects.

How much blood? '' must have cut myself '' 'yeah thats my blood type'

His story was plausible his alibi was strong and most criminologists were still denying teenagers could kill

 

[Kurve]

He was my top POI given these facts

I even explained how it could have been done ie in jocks and showers when he comes back as if getting up for work

But I was wrong

It's the sophistication and orderliness shown in cleaning up that has some profilers, disturbed. It's not that the forward thinking behaviour is beyond a 17yo but that it makes him incredibly dangerous.

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

Not many 17yo’s own cars.

Well back in my day it wasn’t uncommon to buy a car when you were 17 in anticipation of getting your licence when you turned 18. We are talking about the 1970s remember.

 

[GrayRanga]

One vital piece of evidence with DNA on it and collected through his early prowling years, was misfiled and lost for years as well.

I suppose a question must also be asked of what was the capacity of the forensic labs to cope with almost 200 tests in one fell swoop without interfering with their ongoing support to the police and courts

When the idea was first floated they must has asked for it to be prioritised and would have followed the list.

Just as a random thought. Surely one of the first tests done back in 1977 would have been to test for the blood group of the sample?

If it was the same as that found on the knife it would drop him down the list because the owner of the knife may have cut himself using it. If it showed the other victims blood group as well ... red flags

 

[DeliveryProblems]

How much blood? '' must have cut myself '' 'yeah thats my blood type'

His story was plausible his alibi was strong and most criminologists were still denying teenagers could kill

Oh c'mon there's been a double homocide with a knife do some due diligence when blood on a knife is found on a local criminal. John Grant had an alibi everybody had an alibi. The homocide squad were trying to reverse engineer the crime to fit John Grant. Most criminologist would be flabbergasted at how this case was handled. Police on the scene washed their hands in the same sink the perpetrator washed evidence down before forensics could swab it ffs.

 

[GreyCrow]

Oh c'mon there's been a double homocide with a knife do some due diligence when blood on a knife is found on a local criminal. John Grant had an alibi everybody had an alibi. The homocide squad were trying to reverse engineer the crime to fit John Grant. Most criminologist would be flabbergasted at how this case was handled. Police on the scene washed their hands in the same sink the perpetrator washed evidence down before forensics could swab it ffs.

You are now the Police Prosecutor - prosecute the case.

Give us step by step of what you would have done

Given the era and police techniques available

Remembering double jeopardy laws exist

Remembering carrying a knife wasnt actually a criminal offence

Go

 

[DeliveryProblems]

Well back in my day it wasn’t uncommon to buy a car when you were 17 in anticipation of getting your licence when you turned 18. We are talking about the 1970s remember.

I find it intriguing a 17 year old still attending school can buy a car, let alone also be pulled over obviously without a drivers license to be searched for drugs and have a bloodied knife found without being considered a high suspect, regardless of an unproven alibi.

 

[GreyCrow]

As an FYI I think prosecuting this today would be just as difficult

DNA - yeah ok I had sex with her but I left her alive

Knife - I said I found it and I have an alibi

Alibi - I stretched the truth and said I was with my mates longer because I didnt want them to know I was with the chick

Alibi witnesses - If they recant the question is why not anytime in the last 47 years why you didnt come forward. Are they alive to recant?

This is not a slam dunk - unless there is stuff we are not aware of

 

[DeliveryProblems]

You are now the Police Prosecutor - prosecute the case.

Give us step by step of what you would have done

Given the era and police techniques available

Remembering double jeopardy laws exist

Remembering carrying a knife wasnt actually a criminal offence

Go

You need to read the facts which you obviously have not. If you're in possession of a knife with blood on it that you claimed to have found by looking over a bridge in the darkness of night you are suspicious straight away. These 'police techniques' are why it became a cold case.