- Dec 27, 2016
- 29,370
- 61,828
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Moderator
- #326
Didn't they lose all the evidence that possibly had DNA
That's what I thought too. Maybe they've found something.
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.
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Prelim Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Didn't they lose all the evidence that possibly had DNA
Hasn't the theory that were two culprits been known for ages with the last case believed to have been done by someone close to the family?TV show shares bombshell new claims about horrific crime
A new investigative crime series starring podcaster and crime journalist Adam Shand and ‘Human Lie Detector’ Steve van Aperen, is sharing new information on Melbourne’s horrific ‘Mr Cruel’ child abductions.www.perthnow.com.au
The episode sees Shand posit a bombshell theory that Mr Cruel was, in fact, more than one offender, revelations the journalist hopes could lead to the case being reopened by Victorian Police.
In the episode, he conducts an interview with a woman believed to have been Mr Cruel’s first victim, sharing new information, including new DNA evidence, he has uncovered.
It is the first time a victim has ever spoken publicly, and the interview was five years in the making.
“I’ve been working on this case for a long time — I’ve been speaking to former taskforce members who were just not happy with the way (the case) was handled,” Shand told The Sunday Times.
“I was able, through that process, to get some very key documents that began my research.
“Then, by luck, a mutual friend was a friend of one of the victims, and I got to talk to her.”
The Hunters is the first TV program to uncover DNA evidence that proves there were at least two offenders in the Mr Cruel cases.
I think the ethics of doing these podcast deep dives into tragic isues that are decades old in the pursuit of clicks needs to be addressed.
They are victims, not content.
There's always Teacher's Pet, for sure.On the other hand, some investigative podcasts have helped families of the victims of crime find the answers they've been seeking for a long time.
There's always Teacher's Pet, for sure.
How's Adam Shand just so getting the phone calls from sources while recording.. lots of mayo thrown on.
But yeah the premise of show is stated above, DNA saying multiple culprits.. In relation to two of the kidnappings. first and second I think.
The investigators interviewed don't remember DNA being collected.
Just one that did, didn't want his face shown.
The electricity worker theory also mentioned as people let go, bodies buried and girls taken near power stations.
He thinks he’s an actor.That put me off a bit - the subject is so fascinating that it didn't need all the sensationalist dressing up.
Police should look at each attack as a case by case investigation, not necessary linking them to any one guy.
Although I think Shand glossed over a few points, which made police believe the cases were linked.
One thing that always bothered me a little was that when KC was abducted, it was reported that racist words / slogans were scrawled over either the house or the car (or both) of the parents. After a week or so this aspect was never reported again....
With Rhianna. there is a male about 60, that lives about 700m from the victims home. He's reported to have blurted out the words "I've killed a girl". Few of us have put some work into him. He has worked in the Lonsdale area on and off, but importantly he's done a stint at the Pelican point substation. Some of the Melbourne Mr.C researchers maintain Mr.C was an electricity worker. Our guy is a contractor and moved around a bit, we are still looking into him.I don't know what to think of this case.
It was strongly suggested in the TV show about the case on Monday night that there was more than one offender committing these crimes rather than one guy who was the much-feared 'Mr. Cruel', but it seems even less plausible that a number of men could have committed similar crimes around Melbourne at the same time, and none were ever caught. Sure there might be copycats, but they are more likely to mess up and be caught by the police.
And after the Karmein Chan abduction and subsequent murder in April 1991 (her body was not found for another year), no similar crimes in 33 years since then. The only name I've seen with tentative suggestions to the involvement of Mr. Cruel is Rhianna Barreau, a 12-year-old girl who vanished without trace from Adelaide in October 1992, but this only speculation and nothing out of Melbourne where the Mr. Cruel abductions took place in the late 1980s and very early 1990s.
The hunters, also did a episode on the Beaumont's. Filming at the empty Castaloy site. I fear is going to be comical!Ground breaking suggestion!
Of course they did.
This show was all about Shand. Very ordinary by him and the Human Lie Detector. Felt sorry for the other two detectives who probably had no idea the show was going to be produced like that
The media tagging him MR Cruel, actually changed his whole MO for the last attack.
I believe Mr Cruel escalated so extremely he did live up to media expectations. He became Cruel.
I blame KC's murder on the media!
Few observations FWIW.
The first Hampton attack (girl interviewed) seemed to specifically target her. The guy admitted to her that he had broken into the house previously. He also told her his wife had been playing around with her dad and that was the reason for the attack. Surely not hard to follow up if any truth to that? This one could be a one-off, and doesn't suddenly mean Mr. Cruel didn't exist, as claimed by Shand. If the wife/dad story was easily disproven, then it was the start of the red herring trail which became a constant.
The detective whose identity was hidden, reckons there was DNA samples from that first case and the Sharon Wills case. They apparently don't match. Given how huge a DNA sample is, how is it possible that detectives on the Spectrum task force like O'Connor, can't remember their existence? Those detectives might be retired, but none have lost their marbles and you are not forgetting something that significant.
If the samples exist, particularly the SW one, then surely at least some of the "Sierra files" 7 suspects can be exculpated? If not potentially all of them? If you eliminate 6, then at least you can narrow the focus accordingly.
Why, after getting nowhere for 35 years, is there such a reluctance from police to release more accurate information to the public? It's not like the culprit/s are shaking in their boots with where it currently sits.
Some indications MrC was forensically aware, meaning he has knowledge of DNA collection and Handling. Knowing this, he may throw investigators off the trail by planting DNA.Keep thinking about the show and how the big hook was the DNA sample from the first case, but the show never provided any evidence to suggest the DNA sample was from the perpetrator, it's just assumed it was by the hosts. This could explain why the detectives on the case had never heard about it - basically, it wasn't considered strong enough evidence (e.g. it could have been on something that multiple people handled over time).
Also, even if it was the perpetrator's DNA, it's another the leap to conclude that because one of the non-canon cases had different DNA to the Sharon Wills case that the canon cases aren't linked with each other.
Let me know if I missed anything here but the whole premise seems very flawed.