Unsolved The Beaumont Children

[jason_recliner]

Ex-Cop Reveals Where The Beaumont Children Could Be Buried

In 1966, three young siblings caught the bus to Glenelg Beach, and haven't been seen since. Ex-detective Bill Hayes is still trying to solve the case.

articles.listnr.com

The podcast interviews Bill Hayes with his reasoning why he believes Harry Phipps is the prime suspect. He also suggests one area that was searched they didn't dig deep enough because Phipps had put sand on top of this site equivalent to what they dug. So all their digging and they only reached ground level at the time the Beaumonts went missing.

Best to listen.

It's obvious when excavating or taking soil cores when you're in fill or natural soil. Why would they stop before they reached natural soil?

 

[johnymac1]

The Castaloy site has been bare for some time. There is no reason the Phipps conspiracy guys couldn't hire their own GPR. (Ground Penetrating Radar) They must have made a few bucks from pushing their Book. Iam very doubtful they will find anything, their story is based on dubious statements.

 

[YaNaNooNaNooNaNooNaNa]

Phipps would have been found guilty if he had anything to do with it. He was investigated on a number of occasions over the years, and various people are still trying to collar him for the BC disappearance.

 

[grandpa simpson]

I have some thoughts after visiting Glenelg beach and reading through the witness statements and suspects.

1-The killer must be local to Adelaide. 'The man' knew the area well and was clearly worried about getting recognised in the bakery.
2-'The boyfriend' must be a teen or young adult for Jane to even be interested in him. No way would a 9 year old be interested in a middle aged man.
Could it be the son of 'the blonde man'.
3-The dad went to Snowtown for work on Australia day. Was working on Australia day common in 1966? He planned to be away for a few days but came back the same day. I wonder if he was called away by someone who knew him in order to get him out of town? It's odd that the kids get taken as soon as he's out of town.
4-Is there a horse racing connection? A witness saw the children walking with a local 'strapper' from the horse racing track and the 'blonde man' with a middle aged woman was with them.
Was Jim Beaumont really an sp bookmaker? Racing connection? The perp could be a frequent track visitor and punter.
kids love horses and maybe that was a grooming method.
5-Does anyone have any info on Stan hart's son 'Andrew'? who was 19 in 1966.
My theory is he is the 'boyfriend' and Stanley Hart took the kids.

Hart is a top suspect for the Adelaide Oval abduction and police always thought the same person is involved in both.
I don't think it's Brown, Percy, or Bsve.

I feel like the 'boyfriend' knew Jane through any of the following Scouts/School/Racing track/beach surf club.
May not be any use, just my thoughts when i was at the beach this week.

 

[DoubleDraw]

I have some thoughts after visiting Glenelg beach and reading through the witness statements and suspects.

1-The killer must be local to Adelaide. 'The man' knew the area well and was clearly worried about getting recognised in the bakery.
2-'The boyfriend' must be a teen or young adult for Jane to even be interested in him. No way would a 9 year old be interested in a middle aged man.
Could it be the son of 'the blonde man'.
3-The dad went to Snowtown for work on Australia day. Was working on Australia day common in 1966? He planned to be away for a few days but came back the same day. I wonder if he was called away by someone who knew him in order to get him out of town? It's odd that the kids get taken as soon as he's out of town.
4-Is there a horse racing connection? A witness saw the children walking with a local 'strapper' from the horse racing track and the 'blonde man' with a middle aged woman was with them.
Was Jim Beaumont really an sp bookmaker? Racing connection? The perp could be a frequent track visitor and punter.
kids love horses and maybe that was a grooming method.
5-Does anyone have any info on Stan hart's son 'Andrew'? who was 19 in 1966.
My theory is he is the 'boyfriend' and Stanley Hart took the kids.

Hart is a top suspect for the Adelaide Oval abduction and police always thought the same person is involved in both.
I don't think it's Brown, Percy, or Bsve.

I feel like the 'boyfriend' knew Jane through any of the following Scouts/School/Racing track/beach surf club.
May not be any use, just my thoughts when i was at the beach this week.

Some good points! Amongst the countless things i've read about this case over the years you do come across some interesting connections e.g regarding your point number 1-Max Mcintyre lived near and was known to the bakery proprietor(Mrs Wenzel) so i think you're right! Accordin to Andrew Mcintyre his father and Munro attended a 1965 NYE party at Phipps house

 

[newbie11]

I have some thoughts after visiting Glenelg beach and reading through the witness statements and suspects.

1-The killer must be local to Adelaide. 'The man' knew the area well and was clearly worried about getting recognised in the bakery.
2-'The boyfriend' must be a teen or young adult for Jane to even be interested in him. No way would a 9 year old be interested in a middle aged man.
Could it be the son of 'the blonde man'.
3-The dad went to Snowtown for work on Australia day. Was working on Australia day common in 1966? He planned to be away for a few days but came back the same day. I wonder if he was called away by someone who knew him in order to get him out of town? It's odd that the kids get taken as soon as he's out of town.
4-Is there a horse racing connection? A witness saw the children walking with a local 'strapper' from the horse racing track and the 'blonde man' with a middle aged woman was with them.
Was Jim Beaumont really an sp bookmaker? Racing connection? The perp could be a frequent track visitor and punter.
kids love horses and maybe that was a grooming method.
5-Does anyone have any info on Stan hart's son 'Andrew'? who was 19 in 1966.
My theory is he is the 'boyfriend' and Stanley Hart took the kids.

Hart is a top suspect for the Adelaide Oval abduction and police always thought the same person is involved in both.
I don't think it's Brown, Percy, or Bsve.

I feel like the 'boyfriend' knew Jane through any of the following Scouts/School/Racing track/beach surf club.
May not be any use, just my thoughts when i was at the beach this week.

I'm not sure what the police think; whether they believe the same person was involved in both incidents or not. But in my opinion, it wasn’t the same individual. The MO is completely different. I also don’t believe Joanne was ever meant to be kidnapped. If not for her courage and relentless, heroic efforts to fight off the suspect and protect Kirste, she wouldn’t have been taken

I do like the idea of the horses being used as a lure, thou..Realistically, when we cut right to it; the strapper is perhaps the best lead in the case has? He was directly identified by someone who knew both him and the children..

When you look at the sketches of the two unidentified individuals allegedly seen with the strapper, it's clear that the man in the original sketch and this man could very well be the same person

So who was this strapper, and what do we really know about him?

 

[newbie11]

Some good points! Amongst the countless things i've read about this case over the years you do come across some interesting connections e.g regarding your point number 1-Max Mcintyre lived near and was known to the bakery proprietor(Mrs Wenzel) so i think you're right! Accordin to Andrew Mcintyre his father and Munro attended a 1965 NYE party at Phipps house

Unless you want to get drawn into an endlessly evolving narrative, the most productive approach is to simply act as if you didn’t hear what the McIntyre's said. Their claims and descriptions, along with their timelines and sequence of events, contradict scientific understanding on so many levels that I could probably write a whole book just debunking it

 

[DoubleDraw]

Unless you want to get drawn into an endlessly evolving narrative, the most productive approach is to simply act as if you didn’t hear what the McIntyre's said. Their claims and descriptions, along with their timelines and sequence of events, contradict scientific understanding on so many levels that I could probably write a whole book just debunking it

Not necessarily disagreeing with you but what do you consider the main timeline discrepancy?

 

[johnymac1]

I'm not sure what the police think; whether they believe the same person was involved in both incidents or not. But in my opinion, it wasn’t the same individual. The MO is completely different. I also don’t believe Joanne was ever meant to be kidnapped. If not for her courage and relentless, heroic efforts to fight off the suspect and protect Kirste, she wouldn’t have been taken

I do like the idea of the horses being used as a lure, thou..Realistically, when we cut right to it; the strapper is perhaps the best lead in the case has? He was directly identified by someone who knew both him and the children..

When you look at the sketches of the two unidentified individuals allegedly seen with the strapper, it's clear that the man in the original sketch and this man could very well be the same person

So who was this strapper, and what do we really know about him?

correct!
The guy has gone from athletic and frolicking under the sprinkles in 66. To hunched, stocky and walking with a lip in 73.
Not the same guy!

For the Wenzels sighting, I really need another witness to say they were in that shop and saw the kids. Iam tending to disregard that sighting. It came in way too late, at one year. There is a possibility the witness was trying to insert themselves into the investigation.

The comment made by the sister maybe unrelated to the abduction. "Jane has a boyfriend at the beach" The boy Jane met on a previous visit may be just a friend and nothing to do with the abduction. But it's probably the reason she insisted to go back to Glenelg.

The sketch of the PIO may have a few errors. But the general proportions could be a guide to who we are looking for.
Just have to find this guy out of the thousands that lived in Adelaide at the time. They may have known or met the family on a previous occasion.

 

[newbie11]

Not necessarily disagreeing with you but what do you consider the main timeline discrepancy?

Nearly all of the specific forensic details, such as the blood found in AM's car and the post-mortem conditions of the bodies concerning the stages of mortis that they describe ect) do not align with what would typically be expected based on the provided timeline