Unsolved Hunt for Mr Cruel

[GreyCrow]

It's funny you should say that, because that's exactly what I did. Then Mike King copied my Google Map and pretended he created it using GIS. Then Channel 9 put some fancy graphics on it and made a show about it to make lots of money. I still think my map is superior to their crap. It's included all of the substations mentioned in the show for 18 months before they put it in their show. You can find it here: Mr Cruel Map - Google My Maps

I did think of your site. I tried to look and the main road (40) was the only central location I zeroed in on

 

[Exe Gesis]

It's funny you should say that, because that's exactly what I did. Then Mike King copied my Google Map and pretended he created it using GIS. Then Channel 9 put some fancy graphics on it and made a show about it to make lots of money. I still think my map is superior to their crap. It's included all of the substations mentioned in the show for 18 months before they put it in their show. You can find it here: Mr Cruel Map - Google My Maps

You should write to them expressing your displeasure with not crediting your work. Call the police and inform them of your work. You dont have to be a silent sleuth. Many unsolved cases these days have seen some true crime amateur become figures in the case.

 

[SquiffyRae]

Can we also get a load of them calling Mr Cruel "Australia's worst serial killer"

Strictly speaking he's not even a confirmed murderer. He's only got 1 murder that can be linked to him through circumstantial evidence. While I think it's incredibly likely he's responsible for the Karmein Chan murder it's still officially an unsolved crime. Even if we logically conclude he's responsible, that takes him to 1. It's not even serial murder at this point it's just a single murder. If you were making a ranked list he's nowhere.

Snowtown: differing numbers. Bunting's highest with 11 (likely 12)
Ivan Milat: 7 (likely more)
Chris Worrell and James Miller: 7
John Glover: 6
David and Catherine Birnie: 4
Leonard Fraser: 4
Paul Denyer: 3
Bradley Edwards: 2 (likely 3)
Bevan von Einem: 1 (likely 5)
Derek Percy: 1 (likely more)

I'm really interested in their justification for using that phrasing. The show didn't produce one scrap of evidence to suggest Mr Cruel killed anyone other than Karmein Chan. In fact, they didn't produce a scrap of evidence tying him to any crimes after Karmein Chan's murder. So who are all these other people Mr Cruel is meant to have killed? If he's supposedly got Bunting/Wagner and Milat covered, he's responsible for a lot more murders than anyone has ever imagined. But amazingly, all these extra murders didn't warrant a mention. Why? Because Under Investigation are full of s**t

 

[Bunk Moreland]

It's funny you should say that, because that's exactly what I did. Then Mike King copied my Google Map and pretended he created it using GIS. Then Channel 9 put some fancy graphics on it and made a show about it to make lots of money. I still think my map is superior to their crap. It's included all of the substations mentioned in the show for 18 months before they put it in their show. You can find it here: Mr Cruel Map - Google My Maps

I’d be writing to both Channel 9 and Media Watch.

 

[melbournemarvels]

I did think of your site. I tried to look and the main road (40) was the only central location I zeroed in on

Not sure what you mean by the Main Road 40...

 

[GreyCrow]

Not sure what you mean by the Main Road 40...

Bell St

 

[Hojuman]

Can we also get a load of them calling Mr Cruel "Australia's worst serial killer"

Strictly speaking he's not even a confirmed murderer. He's only got 1 murder that can be linked to him through circumstantial evidence. While I think it's incredibly likely he's responsible for the Karmein Chan murder it's still officially an unsolved crime. Even if we logically conclude he's responsible, that takes him to 1. It's not even serial murder at this point it's just a single murder. If you were making a ranked list he's nowhere.

Snowtown: differing numbers. Bunting's highest with 11 (likely 12)
Ivan Milat: 7 (likely more)
Chris Worrell and James Miller: 7
John Glover: 6
David and Catherine Birnie: 4
Leonard Fraser: 4
Paul Denyer: 3
Bradley Edwards: 2 (likely 3)
Bevan von Einem: 1 (likely 5)
Derek Percy: 1 (likely more)

I'm really interested in their justification for using that phrasing. The show didn't produce one scrap of evidence to suggest Mr Cruel killed anyone other than Karmein Chan. In fact, they didn't produce a scrap of evidence tying him to any crimes after Karmein Chan's murder. So who are all these other people Mr Cruel is meant to have killed? If he's supposedly got Bunting/Wagner and Milat covered, he's responsible for a lot more murders than anyone has ever imagined. But amazingly, all these extra murders didn't warrant a mention. Why? Because Under Investigation are full of s**t

But, " all of Australia will be watching "

 

[johnymac1]

The only original idea in the UI program. Was that they used the term "safe house", it is a possibility he used a dwelling other than his own.

The Car was definitely his, as in the first attack he made efforts to conceal it. He parked it in walking distance to the victims home.

 

[Exe Gesis]

The Car was definitely his, as in the first attack he made efforts to conceal it. He parked it in walking distance to the victims home.

A rental would make no sense. Police could easily trace specific dates a same person hired a car that were close to each abduction. So, has to be own car.

 

[melbournemarvels]

I’d be writing to both Channel 9 and Media Watch.

I have written to Media Watch. I haven't written to Channel 9 yet. I imagine they wouldn't really care. I did speak to their researcher back in September who complimented the website. Little did I expect that she was stealing the map and going to pretend it was Mike King's ridiculous GIS technology which found the locations of the substations. Rather it was trawling through old Melways how I found them. And many of the locations are insignificant. For example, the LP attck was 5km away from the Watsonia substation, not close at all. Yet they claimed on the show it was close. The reason I have it marked on may was not because of its proximity to the LP attack but rather because I know linesmen were questioned by police there about the case. This was lost on Mike King and the researchers of the show though. The same goes for the Heatherton substation and its proximity to where the 14 year old Hampton victim was dumped. Again, not close at all, 5km away. These details don't strenghten the electrcial connections theory at all. I'm in the process of doing a big post on all of this plagiarism, and all of the inaccuracies in the show too, such as many of the ones that have already been pointed out on this forum like the embarrassing "Australia's worst serial killer". Channel 9 are a f....g joke.

 

[melbournemarvels]

By the way, I was not the originator of the electrical connections theory. A few people came to it independently, but Clinton Bailey was the first to write about it about ten years ago. Melbourne Marvels however, was the first to map many of the substations and their locations in relation to crime scenes.

 

[melbournemarvels]

Bell St

It might be better to use it on a PC. You can zoom in to any location on the map just like any Google Map. It is extremely detailed and the most comprehensive coverage of the Mr Cruel case that you will find. It even maps a number of other incidents that are possibly linked like the Hampton rapes and the crimes of a main suspect.

 

[melbournemarvels]

But, " all of Australia will be watching "

Lol, they seriously are incompetent.

 

[melbournemarvels]

The only original idea in the UI program. Was that they used the term "safe house", it is a possibility he used a dwelling other than his own.

The Car was definitely his, as in the first attack he made efforts to conceal it. He parked it in walking distance to the victims home.

Yep, I agree with you on both points here. Police always used "detention premises".

 

[Macca180]

Snowtown: differing numbers. Bunting's highest with 11 (likely 12)
Ivan Milat: 7 (likely more)
Chris Worrell and James Miller: 7
John Glover: 6
David and Catherine Birnie: 4
Leonard Fraser: 4
Paul Denyer: 3
Bradley Edwards: 2 (likely 3)
Bevan von Einem: 1 (likely 5)
Derek Percy: 1 (likely more)

I'm really interested in their justification for using that phrasing. The show didn't produce one scrap of evidence to suggest Mr Cruel killed anyone other than Karmein Chan. In fact, they didn't produce a scrap of evidence tying him to any crimes after Karmein Chan's murder. So who are all these other people Mr Cruel is meant to have killed? If he's supposedly got Bunting/Wagner and Milat covered, he's responsible for a lot more murders than anyone has ever imagined. But amazingly, all these extra murders didn't warrant a mention. Why? Because Under Investigation are full of s**t

Does Marty Bryant make the list? or massacres different criteria?

 

[Oct19]

Does Marty Bryant make the list? or massacres different criteria?

Generally one of the definitions of a serial killer is that they have a cooling off period between kills, so Bryant is considered a spree killer, rather than a serial killer.

 

[SquiffyRae]

Generally one of the definitions of a serial killer is that they have a cooling off period between kills, so Bryant is considered a spree killer, rather than a serial killer.

I also could've included Eric Edgar Cooke on this list but didn't cause I've always considered him more as a spree killer than a serial killer. Without wanting to derail the thread with EEC discussion, he always seemed to me like someone who would go on periodic crime sprees and murder just happened to be a part of said sprees. Never really considered him a serial killer in the traditional sense.

Back on topic, Mr Cruel has all the hallmarks of someone who likely would've become a serial killer but didn't. Whether he was arrested or died or just lost whatever weird internal motivation he had after Karmein Chan he doesn't seem to have done anything since

 

[melbournemarvels]

Does Marty Bryant make the list? or massacres different criteria?

I honestly think it was just a **** up. They are not good researchers.

 

[johnymac1]

1/ What do you think, Mr Cruel did for a Job?

Law
Police, Security, Forensic sciences, Lawyer. Media Etc.

Education
High school teacher, University Lecturer, Primary school Teacher, Aid Worker, Groundsman, Childcare, Coach.

Sales
Real estate, Property manager, Retail Sales. Etc.

Trades
Electrician, Lines Man, Carpenter, Painter, Handyman, Plumber, Telecom worker, Etc.

Other
Un-employed, Disability Pension, Student. Not listed here.

2/ What do you think Mr Cruel's hobbies were?

Hobbies Interests like- Music, Movies, US sit-coms, Trains?


3/ What do you think Mr Cruel's home situation was?

Single, Lives alone
Single, Lives with Parents
Single, Lives Interstate
Married
Married with Kids, (girls)

4/ How much surveillance did Mr Cruel do on his Victims?

Occasional Drive-by
None, Followed them home on the Day
Heavy Surveillance by foot and Car

5/ Do you think Mr Cruel entered the victims Property on previous occasions ?

No did not enter
Yes, did case the home.

6/ Where did Mr Cruel get his counter-surveillance and other skills from?, (he knows how to cover up forensic traces)

From TV
From reading and research
From Training

7/ Do you think Mr Cruel is still alive?

yes
no
not sure

 

[melbournemarvels]

1/ The Arts, prospector
2/ movies, TV
3/ Single, lives with mother.
4/ Heavy Surveillance by Car and public transport
5/ No, did not enter.
6/ From TV and reading
7/ yes

 

[melbournemarvels]

I think one of the biggest downfalls of these programs made for commercial television is that too often they want to sensationalise stuff. Under Investigation reminds me a lot of ACA or 60 Minutes. It's the same stupid overly dramatic way of telling every story that gets grating.

They can sensationalise the Mr Cruel story a lot more if they make him out to be some sort of evil genius. Rather than being your run of the mill predator with a half decent understanding of forensics, he has to be this evil genius who spends all his time planning his next assault. It lets them turn Mr Cruel into a bigger boogeyman than he actually is (or was). It's all ratings bait. The same thing happened with the Claremont Serial Killer. You had all these people insisting to get away with it he had to be this genius who planned his every move and then he turns out to be an extremely average telecom technician.

Funnily enough, UI's hypothesis works better with Mr Cruel being an average Joe. If you accept he's an average predator who started in proximity to his own home and then branched out. That he might be a linesman with a power company and used that to help him plan attacks. That the connection is because he feels comfortable with these places. That he's dumb enough to take victims back to his home that is easily identifiable by planes flying low overhead. That he's dumb enough to let his victims see the interior of his home so long as they don't see him. That would all make sense. Enough planning to not get caught but not enough planning to fully cover his tracks.

The evil genius UI want to portray him as would work more in favour of the other hypotheses. That he might have had a decoy house. That the plane noises might have been recordings.

In my opinion, too many people try to overestimate serial killers and predators. Most of them are very, very average people who have a sick mind. They're not evil geniuses from a movie. And especially in the days before DNA analysis was widespread, they didn't need to be. There are some genuine morons out there who have definitely got away with murder

Couldn't agree more.

 

[johnymac1]

1/ The Arts, prospector
2/ movies, TV
3/ Single, lives with mother.
4/ Heavy Surveillance by Car and public transport
5/ No, did not enter.
6/ From TV and reading
7/ yes

I would tend to agree on some points
here's what I think-

1/ Un-employed, or part time Handyman
2/ Movies, TV, crime docos, true crime literature.
3/ Single, at the time, lived with mother. May be married now (Asian wife)
4/ Heavy Surveillance by Car and by foot, possibly using a dog as cover.
5/ No, but may have entered the last property.
6/ From TV and reading
7/ Yes, possibly living in the Philippines

 

[Kwality]

I would tend to agree on some points
here's what I think-

1/ Un-employed, or part time Handyman
2/ Movies, TV, crime docos, true crime literature.
3/ Single, at the time, lived with mother. May be married now (Asian wife)
4/ Heavy Surveillance by Car and by foot, possibly using a dog as cover.
5/ No, but may have entered the last property.
6/ From TV and reading
7/ Yes, possibly living in the Philippines

Have I missed the relevance of this?

 

[johnymac1]

Have I missed the relevance of this?

its partly developing a profile.
i don't agree with FBI profile

 

[MauroFogheri]

Sure the 9 stuff is sensationalist but the ABC is hardly a decent alternative or panacea...I watched a 7:30 Report on Police Shootings in relation to the mentally ill (essentially the line went that most fatal Shootings involve those people with a mental illness - mental illness is a health concern and therefore Police actions are egregious ) the caning the NSW Police force got, not health authorities, left me gobsmacked. Generally, the ABC play to their audience, hang objectivity, whilst you could mount an argument that 60 Minutes at least, whilst sensationalist, has taken a major Left turn which I reckon must be alienating a lot of their traditional viewers.