Unsolved Hunt for Mr Cruel

[Kurve]

Didn't they lose all the evidence that possibly had DNA

That's what I thought too. Maybe they've found something.

 

[Percel]

Sounds a little sensationalist

 

[Eaglette01]

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.

 

[Rob R]

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.

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?

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[tandino]

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.

 

[Kurve]

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.

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.

 

[tandino]

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.

 

[Kurve]

There's always Teacher's Pet, for sure.

There's been a few actually. Families often struggle to get the attention of the press and the public, pods and documentaries help.

Robert Durst was caught out on a hot mic confessing to murders through the making of a documentary.

 

[Macca180]

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.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Shand always comes across as a dickhead. He seems to have the ear of a few media outlets, I guess he delivers views.

I don’t think he and Channel 7 have much credibility between them, so I wouldn’t have expected much.

 

[Darealrath]

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.

That put me off a bit - the subject is so fascinating that it didn't need all the sensationalist dressing up.

Enjoyed seeing the Melbourne Marvels guy as I'd only heard about him from this thread.

 

[Earls Smother]

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.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

That put me off a bit - the subject is so fascinating that it didn't need all the sensationalist dressing up.

He thinks he’s an actor.

 

[johnymac1]

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.

 

[sandeano]

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....

 

[Mister Dog]

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.

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

 

[Bunk Moreland]

So from what I can tell, Shand’s massive claim is that the Hampton cases and the Mr Cruel cases aren’t linked.

I don’t think it’s ever been established that they were? More of hunch of some that have looked at the case.

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....

Their car was covered in graffiti.

It became part of a theory that KC wasn’t a Mr Cruel victim - but was abducted by crime gangs that had a dispute over drugs with Mr Chan.

That theory centred on there being two offenders – one responsible for the abductions, and another responsible for the murder, which was motivated by a dispute with the Chan family.

The theory was supposedly strengthened by certain evidence, including graffiti daubed on the Chan's car referring to "payback" and "Asian drug dealer" on the night of the abduction, the fact Chan was killed, while other victims were released, and that abductions of children were a method of extortion favoured by Chinese criminals.

But it has been confirmed that Taskforce Apollo found no evidence of two offenders, and discounted the theory.

Mr Chan denied any involvement in drugs or crime. VicPol dug as deep as possible into Mr Chan and his past and found nothing criminal.

The conclusion was that the abductor employed some racial profiling* and wrote it on the car as a diversion to throw investigators down a rabbit hole. It worked, somewhat - they definitely looked right into it.

*30-40 years ago there was definitely some level of “drugs are the work of Triads and other Asian gangs” in the community. Many people bought into it - feeding racial stereotypes to white Australia wasn’t exactly difficult. Drugs came out of South East Asia and Asian migrants were gang members and responsible for it.

1995 - Parliamentary Enquiry into Chinese Organised Crime in Australia - https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...completed_inquiries/pre1996/ncaaoc/report/c04

Perhaps a modern comparison would be the stereotype around the Sudanese community and violent crime. Which is a thing of course, but certainly doesn’t apply to the entire Sudanese community.

 

[johnymac1]

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!

 

[emuboy]

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.

 

[johnymac1]

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.

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.
Its been a while since I've done any research or reading on Cruel. But from memory a linking factor may have been the knots he used. The only perp using knots from Adelaide that we know of, Was Deiter Pfennig.

 

[johnymac1]

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 hunters, also did a episode on the Beaumont's. Filming at the empty Castaloy site. I fear is going to be comical!

 

[Lockyer24]

Any press is good press. But don’t really see much in any of the new stuff.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

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!

It was an error too. The media originally dubbed him Mr Cool as he was so calm during the crimes. Somebody heard or transposed it wrong and Mr Cruel stuck.

 

[Darealrath]

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.

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.

 

[johnymac1]

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.

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.

He was so careful not to leave any of the following,
(Note: none of this has been reported by the Media, but could be help by police)
Shoeprints in or near the victim's home
Finger or Palm prints at the victim's home, or on the materials seized by police.
DNA that could lead to his identification.

The show was flawed, but they kind of highlighted the need for a cold case review.
Probably need a special group to complete this task, persons specializing in DNA, profiling and someone to piece it all together.

I have doubts that KC's murder is linked to the previous attacks