Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates

[Coastie19]

You'd think that there aren't too many Telstra workers who had committed assaults of women on the job with Telstra, and that the worker actually kept their job or had been on a 12 month sex offenders treatment course.

You'd hope that Telstra would have been watching and managing the accused like a hawk for his 1990 Hollywood Hospital misdemeanours.

You'd hope that any Telstra legal and Telstra HR would have been involved in any request for cars and drivers, in the CSK case, and that it would have been bought to the attention of Telstra's risk management committee, and the board members and execs that sat on it. Both by WAPOL, and within Telstra.
To manage the risk that one of their current or past workers might be a Claremont Killer.

You'd hope that Telstra would have started their own internal investigations to see what their internal prime suspects (like the accused) were doing on the nights of each of the Claremont Serial Killings, and would have volunteered information to Police on the accused and any other workers of theirs that might have possibly been the perpetrators.

One could be mistaken for thinking that Telstra back then, did not have any inclination to actually want to really help solve the CSK case and the 1995 KK rape (BRE has already pleaded guilty too). Maybe that was one of Telstra's risk mitigation strategies for managing this risk. To not be too helpful.

Police to Telstra: "Can we have a list of vehicles and staff etc as we are following up they might have been used for sexual assaults/other violent crimes"
Telstra to Police: "Sure here you go"
Telstra to each other: "What about we give them the name of the staff member who committed the attempted violent/attempted sexual assault at work"
Telstra to each other: " Nah don't worry about it"

 

[poirot]

yes but she was about to say what her friend had told her, not what he had told her.

True, although I was just explaining the rule generally. But in relation to this particular witness being cut off before she could say "he was _______" - there was no objection by Mr Yovich so it's not possible to say whether she was silenced because the prosecutor knew she was about to say something inadmissible (eg. because it has already been ruled on; because the prejudicial impact would have outweighed any probative value) or some other reason we're not aware of, the prosecution is skirting around some of these more 'juicy' details.

 

[Likeamystery]

This truly saddens me

The inquiry into Telstra vehicles seems almost unbelievable - hard to believe. I read it a couple of times. Very disappointing.

 

[Coastie19]

Perhaps they are only allowed to state they were given a lift and nothing else. As it most likely can't be proven it is him driving any more info could be considered to have prejudicial impact

 

[sprockets]

True, although I was just explaining the rule generally. But in relation to this particular witness being cut off before she could say "he was _______" - there was no objection by Mr Yovich so it's not possible to say whether she was silenced because the prosecutor knew she was about to say something inadmissible (eg. because it has already been ruled on; because the prejudicial impact would have outweighed any probative value) or some other reason we're not aware of, the prosecution is skirting around some of these more 'juicy' details.

Depends on which blog you read. Yovich interrupted (probably objected to) her continuing that sentence.

 

[Ripley]

We might find out, if BRE is found guilty on any murder charges, and any of the accused victims family successfully take legal action against Telstra, and Telstra do not settle out of court, and the the victims families want what happened at Telstra to be made public.

I wonder if any of the victims families knew about this Telstra drivers list issue before today in Court?

Even if BRE is innocent of all the 2 murders he is on trial for, he should have been on that Telstra drivers list, it appears.

What responsibility does Telstra have for his wrongdoings?

 

[Likeamystery]

"asked how she got out of the van she said: "I just remember Annabel yanked me from the back of the van and I remembered she said "that man was..
Before she could finish she was cut off.
...That man was??!! That man was what?!!!!

I can only think of one thing that might be! If she was making reference to an "alleged" indecent act, incidents as such might be grouped together and mentioned at a later date.

 

[BFew]

What responsibility does Telstra have for his wrongdoings?

Maybe hindering a Police investigation.
Harbouring a criminal.
Aiding and abetting a criminal by providing them with resources they committed their crimes using.

 

[Kurve]

What responsibility does Telstra have for his wrongdoings?

Failed duty of care, negligence.

Did they cooperate fully and openly with police? Looks like they didn't.

What measures did they take after being told by investigators one of their employees may have been picking up girls in the Claremont area and loitering/lurking? That one of their employees may be a suspect in a series of crimes? Were they told?

Did they do anything at all? Nothing? Why?

Did they alert the police to an attack on a woman at HH by one of their employees? That same employee who had a car accident in a Telstra vehicle on Stirling Highway?

Nooooooo.

 

[poirot]

Depends on which blog you read. Yovich interrupted (probably objected to) her continuing that sentence.

If that's the case, it's likely because of the prejudicial effect of whatever she was going to say - it's probably something contained in her written statement and if so Mr Yovich would have had been ready to draw. Given the many (hundreds?) of witness statements involved in this case, the DPP & defence team would have agreed between themselves as to inadmissible aspects prior to trial. Any that could not be agreed would be ruled on by the judge.

 

[Chameleon75]

telsta’s incomplete list of vehicles and drivers has the hallmarks of administrative laziness. Hand over a list that’s readily available and not bothering to go through records.

 

[Likeamystery]

Snipped for brevity

One could be mistaken for thinking that Telstra back then, did not have any inclination to actually want to really help solve the CSK case and the 1995 KK rape (BRE has already pleaded guilty too). Maybe that was one of Telstra's risk mitigation strategies for managing this risk. To not be too helpful.

I wonder how much they actually told Telstra's management. I'm sceptical they told them what it was about.

We didn't know anything about the vehicle until they released the documentary when the HJs guy saw CG talking to someone in a light-coloured station wagon.

Back in 1988 when WAPOL doorknocked the neighbours about the break-in they didn't advise what it was about. Just had we seen anything suspicious.

 

[zedx]

Telstra car circled five times in two hours

A woman has told the Claremont serial killings trial she saw a Telstra car circling the area five times in about two hours one night and she even tried to hail the vehicle, thinking it was a taxi.

www.perthnow.com.au

Ms Clements agreed with defence counsel Paul Yovich that she believed there was “something fishy about it”.

Mr Yovich pointed out she made no mention of any conversation with the driver in her original statement, but it emerged in a second statement in September.

Ms Clements said that was because she was asked questions about it.

 

[BFew]

I wonder how much they actually told Telstra's management. I'm sceptical they told them what it was about.

With such a high profile case, I think that Telstra Management would have known that there was a risk that one of their workers was involved, even if they only read the newspapers and watched TV.

Then with the Police asking for info on cars and drivers, Telstra Management would have likely known that there was a good chance it was related to the CSK investigations.

 

[Chameleon75]

With such a high profile case, I think that Telstra Management would have known that there was a risk that one of their workers was involved, even if they only read the newspapers and watched TV.

Then with the Police asking for info on cars and drivers, Telstra Management would have likely known that there was a good chance it was related to the CSK investigations.

Really it doesn’t matter what telstra knew or suspected. Police put in a formal request for information, you comply. It’s not that hard.

 

[BFew]

Police put in a formal request for information, you comply.

Have Telstra broken any laws by knowingly or mistakenly providing incomplete information?

 

[Chameleon75]

Have Telstra broken any laws by knowingly or mistakenly providing incomplete information?

I don’t know

 

[BlueE]

Hmmmmmm........if You are requesting lots of benzodiapene like tranquillisers over a lengthy period of time for sleep problems a GP will often send a patient to a sleep specialist for a second opinion before continuing to prescribe .
Immediately the first photos of Edwards were published after his arrest online pundits were speculating about heavy tranquilliser use due to his general appearance..

Wasn't it a sleep study being run at Charlie Gardner Hospital?

 

[Coastie19]

Surely if police noted something publicly about the Telstra link the HH victim would have come forward, possibly KK witness may make follow up contact, ex misses affaires might have spoke up, andTelstra HR division might make a more conserted effort to provide info a bit more above and beyond some 'lists'. I know info is withheld to protect investigation but surely this would have helped?

 

[Kurve]

I wonder how much they actually told Telstra's management. I'm sceptical they told them what it was about.

One of the requests for information came from MACRO which might have tended to tip them in but hopefully we'll see a copy of it and the header.

 

[FeelingThroaty]

Just theoretically if BRE is guilty, do you think Yovich would be privy to this information or would BRE also be telling Yovich he is innocent? BRE aside whats the usual protocol for crims to tell their lawyers when they are guilty?

Take it from us. We have experienced this. Do not tell your lawyer you are guilty. You did it, or whatever. Don't tell him where you stashed the money, guns, or knife. How do you know the prosecution & Defence don't chat out the case before it goes to trial? If you are in sheep dip the best you can do is shut up. Face the judge in the morning, & try to get bail. A job, surety from a rellie, plus if you were attacked first then you have a lot going for you re seeking bail. I wrote a seven page letter to my lawyer saying what was going on all the way up to my attacker coming to get me. Then I shut up. Same with Detectives. Say you were threatened if so. Say you were petrified, wet your pants even. Any BS does help to get you off. I got off. It never went to trial. So take the pressure & say stuff all. Do not incriminate yourself before trial. I did 22 hours at Hakea. But I shut up. I refused a video interview. What happened to me can happen to anyone of you all.

 

[BFew]

One of the requests for information came from MACRO which might have tended to tip them in but hopefully we'll see a copy of it and the header.

Unfortunately no after more hours documents from today's Court action have/are being released to the media.

Claremont killer trial LIVE: Macro Taskforce probed Telstra car link in 1996 and 1998

More personal details about the man accused of the Claremont serial killings have emerged as another witness - the lover of Bradley Edwards' first wife - expressed he was in fear of Mr Edwards in the mid-1990s.

www.watoday.com.au

Justice Stephen Hall is now going through the media requests for some of today's exhibits tendered in court to be released, including Mr Edwards' assigned vehicle records, and a copy of the fax Telstra sent to WA Police in 1996. He's declined to release any exhibits as he said they are not necessary to ensure the full and accurate reporting of the trial.

 

[kingswood71]

Surely if police noted something publicly about the Telstra link the HH victim would have come forward, possibly KK witness may make follow up contact, ex misses affaires might have spoke up, andTelstra HR division might make a more conserted effort to provide info a bit more above and beyond some 'lists'. I know info is withheld to protect investigation but surely this would have helped?

Yes I really think so too. If they had of mentioned "Macro task force investigation possible link to Telecom/Telstra vans/station wagons" early on (instead of taxi this and taxi that and Williams this etc) then they may have had valuable info come from the start. But then again...I sometimes believe that fate throws a curve ball....they didnt have DNA until 2008, didnt have a match for the grey fibres until 2015 and didnt have blue fibres match until this year!! Say he was charged...he may have been found not guilty in 1999....then...double jeopardy...

 

[FeelingThroaty]

I hope they expand on this

I also read it earlier and had a wtf moment

There is nothing to DIRECTLY link items from one location to another. Nothing was left at another site. Except the offenders DNA.

 

[FeelingThroaty]

'Real men' didn't wear short sleeved shirts when they left the house... That's what my fashion (over)conscious mates at the time would tell you.

Ciara would have done anything to leave DNA to be found later. Ladies know this. Same as with Hayley Dodd. She might have left an earring behind the seat to be hopefully found later. And it was !