Unsolved Girls that went missing from Adelaide Oval 1973

[Kurve]

Of interest.
- Arthur Brown - The Beaumont Children

 

[Angry Red Bull]

A second account is entirely different.

It states that she reported to police 3-4 years after the abduction after she pieced it together. She states that the sighting occurred halfway between Popeye and the University bridge where she saw the man ACROSS THE RIVER for about 1 minute. I have no idea of landmarks but in this version the sighting is across the river not at close range.

Impaired credibility I'm afraid. You can't possibly see the type of glasses from across a river let alone a precise description certain it was Brown 25 years later. If the initial report was 3-4 years later you can't have been involved in the Identikit sketch either. That said those that did make the sketch produced a extremely close match to Brown (1st 3rd and 4th match of software) making that sketch very credible

 

[Angry Red Bull]

When the kids were seen with the older woman tall man and strapper (credibility assumed by multiple confirmations by relatives plus others of posters here) there is no mention at all whether the tall man is the same man as was seen with them at the beach/ reserve. Can't know... different sightings Let's assume it is.

How can it progress from just him to three? None have come forward since so there must be a real prospect of complicity in the abduction. A pedophile ring you assume. No mobile phones in
that era. Yet the prospective abduction was communicated to create greater control with 3 people at least. In advance to a plan? Perhaps. A woman and a strapper walking with a man would seem more innocent than just a man walking with three kids. So planned to leave the beach area with three

Man at reserve steals their money whilst playing but offers a lift. Also suggests they can meet with his friends to go see horses at stables on way home. Meet strapper and woman and walk to car seemingly harmless . Travel to a house at Somerton park where ultimately the three kids are seen again with the man with a crazy walk (stoop) by Miss Gregory being the same man at the reserve perhaps with likeness to AO abductor and Brown. Miss Gregory managed stables there. She isn't implicated at all instead being the witness

Ray Kelly the famous Sydney Detective was so strong in his conviction about Miss Gregory sighting that he wanted to do a house to house search comprising a quarter mile stretch in Somerton Park and a detailed analysis of background of people at each house.

We don't know why he had such confidence. I'm inclined to believe in his undoubted skill and theories drawn.

 

[Lyn]

A second account is entirely different.

It states that she reported to police 3-4 years after the abduction after she pieced it together. She states that the sighting occurred halfway between Popeye and the University bridge where she saw the man ACROSS THE RIVER for about 1 minute. I have no idea of landmarks but in this version the sighting is across the river not at close range.

Impaired credibility I'm afraid. You can't possibly see the type of glasses from across a river let alone a precise description certain it was Brown 25 years later. If the initial report was 3-4 years later you can't have been involved in the Identikit sketch either. That said those that did make the sketch produced a extremely close match to Brown (1st 3rd and 4th match of software) making that sketch very credible

Thanks. Where did you find that information?

Excerpt of witness sue lawrie in seeing the abductor:

"I saw a man coming at rapid pace toward us on the gravel footpath carrying a child. Following behind was a girl running to keep up and absolutely punching into him saying let her go"

The location was on the footbridge. Sue lawrie was with her father and sister to visit the zoo. It doesn't say whether they crossed paths before or after the zoo. That description though implies they actually crossed paths and at close range and that he was coming toward them

Unfamiliar with Adelaide area at all let alone in 73 I can't determine the veracity of location as described. Would there be a gravel path on footbridge?....before or after footbridge?

If this account is accurate and feasible then she would have had ample time to see the man, his features, the glasses, the hat.

This of course is AO abduction which we are discussing because of possible link in Identikit facial recognition of Brown and a stoop link between one witness account of a stoop in Beaumont case also seen in AO case

Adelaide oval is just left of the blue marker. Anzac HW goes straight to Glenelg. About 5km I think. My poi lives just off the Anzac HW, within this frame.

 

[Lyn]

This is the University foot bridge. Which, when looking at the map of Adelaide, is close to the Art Gallery. Far to wide to see specific facial features. It is also the opposite direction to what other witnesses gave.

 

[GreyCrow]

The only foot bridge in the direction of Keswick with emphasis on foot is the weir overpass

 

[Lyn]

So there are walkways on either side of the River. They would have been gravel. Not the bridge.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

The section of the Torrens that is being referenced is the narrowest part of the river between the Frome Rd bridge and the Weir at the Old Adelaide Gaol. Considering the University Footbridges internal arch span is only 46m, the river would be no more than 40m across at that point and the paths ran pretty much along the bank.
Infact, if the sighting was closer to the Popeye wharf at the Frome Rd bridge, the river is probably only 30-35m wide.

I dont think its beyond belief that someone witnessing that kind of commotion over a duration of 1 minute would be able to gain a fair description of the people involved over that distance.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I can't give a great deal of credibility to her report.

She was with her Dad and he hasn't come forward. Why?

She identified Brown 25 years after the abduction and from a TV segment upon his arrest in QLD In 1998. Dubious.

She was on the other side of River. Even allowing for the fact she saw him for a full minute it's still difficult to believe she could be 'certain' as she asserts especially 25 years later

Even if her involvement is questionable the fact remains that several witnesses compiled an Identikit and that drawing has been matched amongst thousands of pictures in facial recognition software to Brown. That is still extremely compelling of itself so much so that if he also has a stoop as described I'd be inclined to say case solved.

 

[FR0GGY]

The section of the Torrens that is being referenced is the narrowest part of the river between the Frome Rd bridge and the Weir at the Old Adelaide Gaol. Considering the University Footbridges internal arch span is only 46m, the river would be no more than 40m across at that point and the paths ran pretty much along the bank.
Infact, if the sighting was closer to the Popeye wharf at the Frome Rd bridge, the river is probably only 30-35m wide.

I dont think its beyond belief that someone witnessing that kind of commotion over a duration of 1 minute would be able to gain a fair description of the people involved over that distance.

This is just west of the frome road bridge on the north side.

 

[charlie20]

there is this sighting, and there is the bonython park/port road sighting, they CANNOT both be right, the zoo sighting was not reported to police for several years, whereas the bonython park sighting was reported early on, early september it was being reported in the newspapers, so which is it ? imo - bonython park, without a doubt

 

[Lyn]

The section of the Torrens that is being referenced is the narrowest part of the river between the Frome Rd bridge and the Weir at the Old Adelaide Gaol. Considering the University Footbridges internal arch span is only 46m, the river would be no more than 40m across at that point and the paths ran pretty much along the bank.
Infact, if the sighting was closer to the Popeye wharf at the Frome Rd bridge, the river is probably only 30-35m wide.

I dont think its beyond belief that someone witnessing that kind of commotion over a duration of 1 minute would be able to gain a fair description of the people involved over that distance.

Agree, she could have seen a commotion, but she also gave specific facial details. And why didn't her brother or Father make statements?

 

[johnymac1]

I think she's trying to insert herself into the investigation. A good investigator, be it police or investigative reporter would pick up on that.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

This is just west of the frome road bridge on the north side.

View attachment 1622573

Agreed, but that picture is taken from War Memorial Drive which is much higher and further away than the footpath that runs alongside the river bank below which is out of sight in the picture.

Im not saying her story is correct necessarily, just that the area in which she claims to have seen this unfold is a narrow part of the river and possible.

 

[Lyn]

This is just west of the frome road bridge on the north side.

View attachment 1622573

Do you really think a person could see specific facial features, hat and spectacles on, from that distance? Not to report it until many years later.

 

[Lyn]

I think she's trying to insert herself into the investigation. A good investigator, be it police or investigative reporter would pick up on that.

Agree, but this woman's account was the key focus in the tv report last year. They obviously didn't corroborate facts.

 

[Lyn]

I can't give a great deal of credibility to her report.

She was with her Dad and he hasn't come forward. Why?

She identified Brown 25 years after the abduction and from a TV segment upon his arrest in QLD In 1998. Dubious.

She was on the other side of River. Even allowing for the fact she saw him for a full minute it's still difficult to believe she could be 'certain' as she asserts especially 25 years later

Even if her involvement is questionable the fact remains that several witnesses compiled an Identikit and that drawing has been matched amongst thousands of pictures in facial recognition software to Brown. That is still extremely compelling of itself so much so that if he also has a stoop as described I'd be inclined to say case solved.

Can you remember what facial recognition they used in that program?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Program Liz Hayes Under investigation. I'll have another look. They did spend quite a bit of time discussing it and results so maybe there will be more detail on second look. They especially discussed that it was an Identikit sketch.... Normally it's only pictures used. They put multiple pictures at different ages of Brown. That's why there were multiple matches.

They also said it was a company which specialises in it's use

 

[FR0GGY]

Do you really think a person could see specific facial features, hat and spectacles on, from that distance? Not to report it until many years later.

Nope definitely not

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Do you really think a person could see specific facial features, hat and spectacles on, from that distance? Not to report it until many years later.

But that's not the distance she saw it from, that picture is deceiving as its not from the path on that side of the river, the walking path is down below and much closer to the river and opposing path.
I'm really not sure why anyone is taking that picture as evidence of anything, a quick Google Earth check will show the walking path next to the river that's been there as long as I can remember.

If people want to dismiss it because it doesn't suit their narrative of events then so be it, but don't point to misleading photos to discredit it as anyone familiar with the area will know it's not an accurate portrayal.

Also, the witness, Sue Laurie, didn't wait 25yrs to report her sighting, she did it 3 or 4 years after the event and it was never followed up, it wasn't until a friend in Adelaide directed her, now living in Victoria, to photos of Brown recently published in regards to his arrest in Townsville, she then came forward and said it was Brown who she saw that day 25yrs earlier.
If the witness was mistaken and confused Brown and Hart who looked similar and it was in fact Hart she saw, heading East from the oval is a much quicker route via the parklands to Prospect or Parkside which I believe is where Hart was registered as living when the girls were abducted.
Both suburbs are accessible via the cover of the parklands from the Eastern side of the city.

 

[FR0GGY]

But that's not the distance she saw it from, that picture is deceiving as its not from the path on that side of the river, the walking path is down below and much closer to the river and opposing path.
I'm really not sure why anyone is taking that picture as evidence of anything, a quick Google Earth check will show the walking path next to the river that's been there as long as I can remember.

If people want to dismiss it because it doesn't suit their narrative of events then so be it, but don't point to misleading photos to discredit it as anyone familiar with the area will know it's not an accurate portrayal.

Also, the witness, Sue Laurie, didn't wait 25yrs to report her sighting, she did it 3 or 4 years after the event and it was never followed up, it wasn't until a friend in Adelaide directed her, now living in Victoria, to photos of Brown recently published in regards to his arrest in Townsville, she then came forward and said it was Brown who she saw that day 25yrs earlier.
If the witness was mistaken and confused Brown and Hart who looked similar and it was in fact Hart she saw, heading East from the oval is a much quicker route via the parklands to Prospect or Parkside which I believe is where Hart was registered as living when the girls were abducted.
Both suburbs are accessible via the cover of the parklands from the Eastern side of the city.

My apologies I didnt actually realise there was another path there. But from Google earth it looks only to be the same distance closer as the road to the top path. Still looks along way away to be seeing facial features, especially with a hat on.

 

[PenfoldsFan]

My apologies I didnt actually realise there was another path there. But from Google earth it looks only to be the same distance closer as the road to the top path. Still looks along way away to be seeing facial features, especially with a hat on.
View attachment 1623052

The bottom path is a lot closer both in distance and elevation, the road would be a good 15 to 20m above the river and lower path at that point.

Depends what facial features we're given.
The long narrow face would be easy to distinguish over that distance, perhaps the big ears and nose too, facial hair or lack of, hair length and colour, all possible to a 14y olds eyesight
Certainly not eye colour ot scars etc.

Do we actually know what was given or are we just lumping face shape in with eye colour and saying impossible from 35m?
This is why I question the identity of the POI versus the obvious facial and dress similarities between Hart and Brown.
She may have seen features that resemble both but named Brown due to the Mackay arrest whereas she may have actually seen Hart.

 

[Lyn]

Program Liz Hayes Under investigation. I'll have another look. They did spend quite a bit of time discussing it and results so maybe there will be more detail on second look. They especially discussed that it was an Identikit sketch.... Normally it's only pictures used. They put multiple pictures at different ages of Brown. That's why there were multiple matches.

They also said it was a company which specialises in it's use

Yes, there was a big focus on the photo matches. I just cant remember what it was called.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I watched the under investigation podcast again. The software used was by NEC biometrics I think they called it and is the software used by aust police. There were over 5000 pictures in the data base so it's an amazing result to match Brown so convincingly.

Intriguingly there was a small clip of video of Brown at his Mackay sisters hearings. He definitely has a funny walk it appears where swings longer than normal arms and ***** his right leg at funny angle when taking a step. I would love it to have been longer but I'm interested enough to say it's an issue. Is it a stoop? Don't know. Definitely want to see more. Jury out

 

[Lyn]

I watched the under investigation podcast again. The software used was by NEC biometrics I think they called it and is the software used by aust police. There were over 5000 pictures in the data base so it's an amazing result to match Brown so convincingly.

Intriguingly there was a small clip of video of Brown at his Mackay sisters hearings. He definitely has a funny walk it appears where swings longer than normal arms and ***** his right leg at funny angle when taking a step. I would love it to have been longer but I'm interested enough to say it's an issue. Is it a stoop? Don't know. Definitely want to see more. Jury out

Thanks so much. Quite amazing from 5000 photos. From watching, what is your opinion of him being able to carry the three year old a long way - depending on which witnesses are correct?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Thanks so much. Quite amazing from 5000 photos. From watching, what is your opinion of him being able to carry the three year old a long way - depending on which witnesses are correct?

That was in 1998, 25 years after AO. He
was then 86. He isn't strong enough in that video but probably would have been in 73 imo. You read his profile and it's clear he was always very strong.