Current Julie Cutler - Murder - 1988 - Cottesloe WA *To the Coroner

[BFew]

Inquest into the Suspected death of Julie CUTLER

https://www.coronerscourt.wa.gov.au/_files/Inquest_2023/CUTLER, Julie Leanne.pdf (49 pages)
'[2023] WACOR 19
JURISDICTION : CORONER'S COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
ACT : CORONERS ACT 1996
CORONER : SARAH HELEN LINTON, DEPUTY STATE CORONER HEARD :
3 - 4 NOVEMBER 2022 DELIVERED : 6 APRIL 2023
FILE NO/S : CORC 830 of 2019
DECEASED : CUTLER, JULIE LEANNE'

 

[zedx]

Her uncle David suicided 20/10/1974, when she was 8, Her Uncle Brian went to jail on 17/7/1972 when she was 10. Both these events, I think were too long before Julie's disappearance on 20/6/1988 to have any bearing upon her state of mind in 1988.
The only event that the Coroner states had any bearing upon her state of mind over the years was the death of her mother on 4/1/1976. Some 12 years to change suicidal ideation to a suicidal Act? How likely is that? Her sister Nicole experienced the same circumstances through her life, so environmental factors don't seem to cause the same adverse psychological outcomes if Julie's disappearance is at her own hand.
And accepting that would mean ignoring some of the evidence that would seem to indicate a third party possibly being involved. Maybe if there was foul play, it might never be solvable without further evidence, but should an open case be shelved because we're betting only upon an unproven suicide theory and the lack of ability to find evidence to solve the mystery of what reallydid happen?

I have to disagree, JC had traumatic events occur in her life at the ages of 8, 10 and 12. Add to that at 14 her father remarried. Also adding the fact that she MAY have been predisposed to suicidal tendencies through heredity IMHO I would say she was a prime candidate for suicide. These events could have affected her tremendously, molding her outlook on life.
Alas, just a theory as we may never know now.

 

[metic]

Let's suppose she did die due to suicide in the ocean.
How many hours before she floats to surface?

 

[FTY1]

What happens in Kalgoorlie

Father lives in Kalgoorlie or lived their at the time of her disappearance.

 

[mrskafoops]

Kalgoorlie, did JC ever visit Kalgoorlie?
anybody know?

Family was there at some point

Yes, I believe she did. Why?

 

[mrskafoops]

What happens in Kalgoorlie

Mining & sex work for the most part

 

[ms finch]

Let's suppose she did die due to suicide in the ocean.
How many hours before she floats to surface?

I’m not sure what difference that makes or that it’s even determinable. There are no hard and fast rules about how a body behaves in the ocean.

The bodies of people who die in the ocean are often never found. She may not have floated to the surface at all. Her body may have been attacked by sharks.

 

[skygem]

Father lives in Kalgoorlie or lived their at the time of her disappearance.

yes, maybe there is more into this case that we do not know yet...

 

[skygem]

I’m not sure what difference that makes or that it’s even determinable. There are no hard and fast rules about how a body behaves in the ocean.

The bodies of people who die in the ocean are often never found. She may not have floated to the surface at all. Her body may have been attacked by sharks.

sharks are not everywhere in the ocean, it is 1 for 100,000 at any given moment

 

[ms finch]

sharks are not everywhere in the ocean, it is 1 for 100,000 at any given moment

It’s one plausible explanation for why Julie’s body was never found. There have been shark attacks on that stretch of the coast around Cottesloe.

 

[mrskafoops]

and OMC

What is that?

 

[skygem]

It’s one plausible explanation for why Julie’s body was never found. There have been shark attacks on that stretch of the coast around Cottesloe.

well, then this has to be the first....Cottesloe beach this afternoon, and swimming, so many happy in the Indian ocean, besides our extended summer, nope...no fear of sharks
was in the company of many swimmers, A Shark Sighting is 1 in 10, 000, 000.
And how many swimmers to that ratio : 10
so highly unlikely, even due to the brutal current of the ocean at the time of her JC car was in the interests of Perth, even fish would not be found of these wild and vicious swells and rapids, so JC was not taken by a shark.

 

[ms finch]

well, then this has to be the first....Cottesloe beach this afternoon, and swimming, so many happy in the Indian ocean, besides our extended summer, nope...no fear of sharks
was in the company of many swimmers, A Shark Sighting is 1 in 10, 000, 000.
And how many swimmers to that ratio : 10
so highly unlikely, even due to the brutal current of the ocean at the time, even fish would not be found of these wild and vicious swells and rapids, so JC was not taken by a shark.

I’m sure your personal experience of Cottesloe beach this particular afternoon and the statistical information on sharks is very comforting to people who have been attacked or even killed by them.

 

[skygem]

Father lives in Kalgoorlie or lived their at the time of her disappearance.

interesting, do you know what his interests were in Kalgoorlie?

 

[skygem]

I’m sure your personal experience of Cottesloe beach this particular afternoon and the statistical information on sharks is very comforting to people who have been attacked or even killed by them.

It's not me, It's the sharks life, you enter the water, you take the risk. unfortunately some have met the consequences, and some have not.

 

[metic]

I’m not sure what difference that makes or that it’s even determinable. There are no hard and fast rules about how a body behaves in the ocean.

The bodies of people who die in the ocean are often never found. She may not have floated to the surface at all. Her body may have been attacked by sharks.

That didnt answer my question.
I think that shows me you are just having a stab in the dark.
When the body is on the surface floating it will be moved by surface currents generated by wind, for example. If the body is sunk at the bottom of the ocean floor then it won't be moved in the same way.
The fact the seat and other item washed ashore, by the wind and waves , is also being disregarded

 

[ms finch]

That didnt answer my question.
I think that shows me you are just having a stab in the dark.
When the body is on the surface floating it will be moved by surface currents generated by wind, for example. If the body is sunk at the bottom of the ocean floor then it won't be moved in the same way.
The fact the seat and other item washed ashore, by the wind and waves , is also being disregarded

The things I am saying are supported by what has happened to other people in the ocean many times over, and I’m basing my analysis on that. It’s reasoned and backed up. It is far from a stab in the dark. In fact there is substantially more evidence supporting suicide here than there is any other theory.

People disappear in the ocean and despite the best efforts to understand currents they cannot find their bodies. They have become better at this over time, but even now with significantly greater expertise they can’t figure it out.

Bodies and inanimate objects do not behave the same in water and especially the ocean. It makes no sense to base what happened to Julie’s body on what happened with the car or pieces of the car. If it were true that bodies behave the same as inanimate objects they would always find bodies with wreckage, and they demonstrably don’t.

If Julie went into the water, we don’t know how she behaved, which could also explain the difference. She was drunk, it was dark and in this scenario she also attempted suicide. There is a high chance of disorientation that could have contributed to her body disappearing.

There was also significant time between when it is believe the car (and her) went into the ocean. If they’d been tracking it from shortly afterward I would say there was less chance of her body disappearing. But there was enough time to allow for many different things. Moreover, they didn’t engage in a comprehensive ocean search to see if her body was further out to sea or stuck near the bottom somewhere. Had they done so, it may have been found.

The theory that she was murdered and did not go in the ocean seems to be entirely based on a belief that she absolutely should have been found near the shore. There’s no reason for that. If that were true they would find almost everyone who disappears in the ocean, and they don’t.

ETA: I did answer your question in the sense that I indicated I regard it as silly and having no relevance. There is no way for anyone to know with any certainty whether Julie floated to the surface, how long it would have taken, or what she was doing once she was in the water. And not knowing that doesn’t at all change anything about the likelihood of suicide or increase the likelihood that this was murder.

 

[mrskafoops]

'silly and having no relevance' - not really. That's a bit harsh.

 

[ms finch]

'silly and having no relevance' - not really. That's a bit harsh.

Not really in response to being told that I was just “having a stab in the dark”, which was thoroughly unnecessary and unfounded rudeness.

 

[metic]

The things I am saying are supported by what has happened to other people in the ocean many times over, and I’m basing my analysis on that. It’s reasoned and backed up. It is far from a stab in the dark. In fact there is substantially more evidence supporting suicide here than there is any other theory.

People disappear in the ocean and despite the best efforts to understand currents they cannot find their bodies. They have become better at this over time, but even now with significantly greater expertise they can’t figure it out.

Bodies and inanimate objects do not behave the same in water and especially the ocean. It makes no sense to base what happened to Julie’s body on what happened with the car or pieces of the car. If it were true that bodies behave the same as inanimate objects they would always find bodies with wreckage, and they demonstrably don’t.

If Julie went into the water, we don’t know how she behaved, which could also explain the difference. She was drunk, it was dark and in this scenario she also attempted suicide. There is a high chance of disorientation that could have contributed to her body disappearing.

There was also significant time between when it is believe the car (and her) went into the ocean. If they’d been tracking it from shortly afterward I would say there was less chance of her body disappearing. But there was enough time to allow for many different things. Moreover, they didn’t engage in a comprehensive ocean search to see if her body was further out to sea or stuck near the bottom somewhere. Had they done so, it may have been found.

The theory that she was murdered and did not go in the ocean seems to be entirely based on a belief that she absolutely should have been found near the shore. There’s no reason for that. If that were true they would find almost everyone who disappears in the ocean, and they don’t.

ETA: I did answer your question in the sense that I indicated I regard it as silly and having no relevance. There is no way for anyone to know with any certainty whether Julie floated to the surface, how long it would have taken, or what she was doing once she was in the water. And not knowing that doesn’t at all change anything about the likelihood of suicide or increase the likelihood that this was murder.

I respect the theory you have proposed, i am just
taking the opportunity to "cross examine" your theory. I am the researcher who found the historical weather and wave data that showed the waves and weather conditions for the week or two around the 20th June 1988. So I have a theory based on those conditions, which made it highly likely that a body would wash ashore during the days / weeks after incident. Have spent years on beaches studying waves and weather, I am not baffled by "mysteries of the ocean" , I like to decipher and understand why. I do this day in day out my whole life.
Have you taken into consideration the wind direction of the day's / week after her disappearance?
There is never any way to get the exact time of a body floating but experts do get close to accurate, they have ways to calculate an approximation, air temperature and water temperature are the factors to be considered.
I asked the question so as to raise the topic and discuss it, thats what we do on these forums.
It is surprising you consider this irrelevant and are not sure what is the importance of this, if her body went in the ocean then let's discuss what happened to it...did it stay close to cottesloe? or if it was floating, then it will travel much further obviously.
Also how many shark attacks occurred around the time 1988 at Cottesloe Beach or surrounding area? Another theory we can look into- what are the chances?

 

[mrskafoops]

I’ve been thinking of the suicide theory again. Julie’s behaviour just prior to her disappearance didn’t seem suicidal. Is this normal? Though I guess people would’ve intervened if she were a mess talking about self harm.

 

[Redacted]

Her father's interests in Kalgoorlie are well documented. Just search for his name in Trove. He appeared as a witness in the case against his brother in the early 1970's. Given the nature of his company at the time being involved in mineral exploration, it is expected for him to be based in Kalgoorlie.

 

[Redacted]

The case and conviction of her uncle was extensively reported in the 1970's. This particular case caused the Government to create ASIC to prevent it from happening again. To say that it mimics the storyline of the movie "Nickel Queen" is a pretty good analogy. When I discovered the case in Trove, it lead me to wonder if Julie could of been kidnapped for ransom. I won't go over the theory again as it's well documented on this thread already and upon another sleuthing forum. I have suggested who could of pulled it off and why he'd abandon completing it. In my mind the theory is still a valid possibility and Everett's first wife may have enough information to rule it out if she remembers what his movements were on the weekend in question.
What I was told by a Chef at my wife's previous employment which has been subsequently detailed when Bret Christain reported his story hasn't changed my mind about the kidnapping theory. Only the discovery of further evidence will determine for me which paths to rule out. There are many coincidences that support the kidnap gone wrong theory and it should be easy for WAPOL to disprove it by interviewing people to establish Everett's movements on the days in question.
It should be easy for WAPOL to disprove the alternate Chef's theory as well by further examination of the place where he allegedly saw two men digging a hole.
Disproving theories is how science works to get to the truth. I'm sure that her family wants the truth.

 

[Redacted]

Have WAPOL interviewed Julie's Aunt, Julie Kathryn Cutler (nee Davies), to ask her if she suspected anyone of following her prior to the disappearance of her niece? I only ask that because that was Everett's M.O. in his subsequent kidnappings, and my theory is that her Aunt may have been Everett's intended target due to what the sentencing Judge said in Brian's conviction, the coincidence of names, a small age gap, that Julie 's Aunt worked near the site of the allegation of a car following Julie on Stirling Highway, and Everett's notoriety for making some pretty stupid mistakes

 

[mrskafoops]

The case and conviction of her uncle was extensively reported in the 1970's. This particular case caused the Government to create ASIC to prevent it from happening again. To say that it mimics the storyline of the movie "Nickel Queen" is a pretty good analogy. When I discovered the case in Trove, it lead me to wonder if Julie could of been kidnapped for ransom. I won't go over the theory again as it's well documented on this thread already and upon another sleuthing forum. I have suggested who could of pulled it off and why he'd abandon completing it. In my mind the theory is still a valid possibility and Everett's first wife may have enough information to rule it out if she remembers what his movements were on the weekend in question.
What I was told by a Chef at my wife's previous employment which has been subsequently detailed when Bret Christain reported his story hasn't changed my mind about the kidnapping theory. Only the discovery of further evidence will determine for me which paths to rule out. There are many coincidences that support the kidnap gone wrong theory and it should be easy for WAPOL to disprove it by interviewing people to establish Everett's movements on the days in question.
It should be easy for WAPOL to disprove the alternate Chef's theory as well by further examination of the place where he allegedly saw two men digging a hole.
Disproving theories is how science works to get to the truth. I'm sure that her family wants the truth.

I feel like I’m about to disappear down the Julie Cutler rabbit hole again.
Do we have any idea who Evertte’s wife is?
The chefs account is also a strong one.

 

[zedx]

I’ve been thinking of the suicide theory again. Julie’s behaviour just prior to her disappearance didn’t seem suicidal. Is this normal? Though I guess people would’ve intervened if she were a mess talking about self harm.

Quite often there are no outward signs that some one is suicidal, even to close friends and family. There are many examples of this. You just cant tell.