Unsolved The Beaumont Children

[bluegirlz]

Makes we wonder why you reacted with shock and horror at me commenting that police brush people off when you knew it all along.

Oh gosh..where did i react like that? Please do show it!

Maybe stay on topic.

bottom line is a stansbury dig WILL happen and that either gives answers as the McIntyre children claim or we all go back to step 1 and start again!

thats the best lead to date better than Castelloys link IMO.

 

[GreyCrow]

bottom line is a stansbury dig WILL happen and that either gives answers as the McIntyre children claim or we all go back to step 1 and start again!

And if nothing is found? What level of believability then surrounds the McIntyres?

 

[bluegirlz]

And if nothing is found? What level of believability then surrounds the McIntyres?

Unfortunately the McIntyre’s are not the only people i have heard stansbury claims from.
i have been privy to see quite a lot of evidence of claims & many more people with same/similar claims waiting to step forward. It may be larger than most believe to be possible.

 

[sprockets]

Oh gosh..where did i react like that? Please do show it!

Maybe stay on topic.

bottom line is a stansbury dig WILL happen and that either gives answers as the McIntyre children claim or we all go back to step 1 and start again!

thats the best lead to date better than Castelloys link IMO.

Your reaction is there for everyone to see.

The Stansbury site has people who say they were told by someone else the Beaumont kids are in there. Of course, Andrew says he knows they're buried there but that's actually not true (and you wonder why people think they're not telling the truth). Castalloy had witnesses that actually dug the hole.

 

[bluegirlz]

Your reaction is there for everyone to see.

The Stansbury site has people who say they were told by someone else the Beaumont kids are in there. Of course, Andrew says he knows they're buried there but that's actually not true (and you wonder why people think they're not telling the truth). Castalloy had witnesses that actually dug the hole.

My reaction? Ok move on, however you wish to see that.

You say stansbury has been bought up by people who told people who told people..no you’re way off there. I know the documents ive seen and this is no here say. A former speaker of the house (passed on now) also had been given this info, his notes were also written on the document.
Please dont suggest my information is here say based on Chinese whispers, you so far from the truth!

 

[bluegirlz]

Very well articulated. It's not everyone saying they're making this up, only a very few vocal one or two on here.

SAPOL refused to take Andrew's statement of abuse against Munro for 10 years. It was only after Andrew gave his evidence to the recent Royal Commission into Child Abuse and the RC recommended prosecution that SA took the evidence.

There was every reason for SAPOL to believe Andrew with his credible evidence and only logical reason SAPOL refusal to act until told to by the RC, is similar to your story of the investigator being told to walk away.

SAPOL not only have the McIntyre statements and evidence, but from other independent witnesses to put the pieces of the abduction of the Beaumont children puzzle together. I believe a Coroners Inquiry should be held to test the evidence they have to discover what really happened to the children and see if there is enough for a prosecution.

I'm sure many don't want this although most who witnesses allege were involved are now deceased. One in particular, the possible owner of the car described in the Vietnam veterans statement who became one of SA top law officials.

Exactly right. My research has lead me many places and McIntyre children are not the only ones speaking up now the not the only ones mentioning a stansbury location, nor the only ones who suggest Max’s involvement. Neither people/person are connected in any way!

 

[sprockets]

My reaction? Ok move on, however you wish to see that.

You say stansbury has been bought up by people who told people who told people..no you’re way off there. I know the documents ive seen and this is no here say. A former speaker of the house (passed on now) also had been given this info, his notes were also written on the document.
Please dont suggest my information is here say based on Chinese whispers, you so far from the truth!

 

[johnymac1]

To me the McIntyre's come across as very much "anti police" It comes across in their statements, they may have had issues in the past.
Does it prevent them from being taken seriously?

 

[bluegirlz]

To me the McIntyre's come across as very much "anti police" It comes across in their statements, they may have had issues in the past.
Does it prevent them from being taken seriously?

Excellent point you make!

However, considering the corruption levels, their claims (and many others) can not be disregarded.

 

[Kurve]

To me the McIntyre's come across as very much "anti police" It comes across in their statements, they may have had issues in the past.
Does it prevent them from being taken seriously?

The police are people too and not incapable of bias but faik Andrew only has a prior for a bit of smoke and what they could not get away with, is saying the claims made had been thoroughly investigated if they were not. There's too much noise around this.

How thoroughly the claims were investigated in reality, might be debatable.

 

[GreyCrow]

Unfortunately the McIntyre’s are not the only people i have heard stansbury claims from.
i have been privy to see quite a lot of evidence of claims & many more people with same/similar claims waiting to step forward. It may be larger than most believe to be possible.

Are you suggesting other bodies are buried there?

 

[bluegirlz]

Are you suggesting other bodies are buried there?

I am suggesting

Are you suggesting other bodies are buried there?

i have had Reference to stansbury made a few times in the past.

 

[GreyCrow]

I am suggesting

i have had Reference to stansbury made a few times in the past.

I dont believe there is but I support a dig there

I assume you have the parameters of the dig mapped out? There will be no '' oops we dug in the wrong spot?''

AM is certain of where the bodies are?

I just dont want another Castalloy where argument rages about the wrong spot being dug. Settle it once and once and for all. I think thats fair on all parties

 

[DropBearess]

This is my first post on this thread. I have followed this case since the day it began and have taken a particular interest in it all my life.

I was born and raised very close to Glenelg and l and my 2 siblings at the time were of similar age to the children. Accompanied by our mother, we frequented the area often and knew the locale very well including bus routes, landmarks, short cuts etc. At this time there was a bus which ran between Port Adelaide and Glenelg, it's primary route being near to the foreshore nearly all the way. When on it's way to the bay, it terminated outside Wenzels. It ran hourly on week days and Australia Day that year was not a public holiday. We caught it frequently and my family had been at "the bay", as we called it, two days earlier. It was incredibly busy with kids everywhere and we bought lunch at Wenzels, as we always did. The queues, crowds and chaos in this shop at lunchtime during school holidays would be unforgettable for South Australians who went there in those days.

As a kid, teenager and young adult, l became almost obsessed at times with trying to discover the fate of the children. I absorbed every scrap of information l could find. I still don't miss much.
But l'm confused in recent years, unless l've somehow missed something. I would like to know when, how and from which source came the information that the children bought enough food and drinks for six people? This seems to now be the basis of so many theories! For at least 30 years, it was reported the children just bought their own lunch, plus a pasty for their mother. I accept that the denomination they allegedly used to pay could have been confused over time, as I believe the police deliberately witheld certain information.

So are we going to believe the children bought multiple lunches or not, and base our theories on this? We need to explore several known facts first, from 1966:-
* There were no white plastic bags then, just brown paper bags. You brought your own string bag if you needed a few things from the shop.
* Pies, pasties and cakes were sold one to a bag, the pies etc. being much bigger than they are now. Mingy shopkeepers would try to squash two in and break them.
* There were absolutely no plastic bottles in 1966. All soft drinks then were in thickened, green tinted glass, with the bottle weighing more than the drink. When l was Jane's age, my six year old brother and l were allowed to walk 400m to the local shop every Friday afternoon to bring home two big bottles of Coke and Woodies in a string bag. They were bloody heavy!
* All bottles in those days required bottle openers.
* The airline bag Jane was carrying had only one over-shoulder handle.

* And another verifiable fact:- the Beaumont children were carrying either on their person or with them 15-17 items before they bought anything.

So picture this. Children enter shop, Jane carrying her bag, probably containing whatever they weren't wearing. They would've had at least one wet towel, although some reports state they had no towels. The kids are served all this food (according to recent reports six p & ps and six buns or something?). So that's six bags if it's just p & ps. Add another six bags if buns are involved = 12 bags. At best if two items in each bag = 6 bags. Then come the soft drinks as described above. So the kids are now grappling with 12 paper bags, minimum 6, plus 2 bloody heavy bottles, armed only with one airways bag and at least one wet towel. How can this be? Grant could have carried very little.
How could three kids grappling with all that food and drink possibly go un-noticed by potential witnesses? If the shop assistant truly remembered serving them, how did she hand it all over to the children and where did they put it? Surely the latter should have been more memorable than other details?
My theory, for what it's worth, is just that the children were served quickly amongst a big crowd and bought their own lunch, which they could carry and had probably half-eaten before they squeezed out of the shop. Or perhaps, just perhaps, they decided to treat themselves to a finger bun each and walk home. The fare and a bun each would've been the same. I think their presence in the shop went almost unnoticed.
I don't believe we should be basing all our theories on one memory in one cake shop, but yes, definitely to eye-witnesses on the reserve. I think we need to accept that. The postie? I'm not sure. And exactly what time did the children catch the bus from home. Was it 8.45 or 10?
* l have met the McIntyres on two occasions in my efforts to delve into this. They are very convincing and seemingly authentic. Goodness knows why they would carp on for so long about this. Who knows?
* Munro, Satin Man? All of them totally sick, but a sudden progression to triple murder after years of successfully and sordidly dabbling in fetishes and abuse? Who knows?
* Police conspiracy? Who knows?
* l would like to know where Derek Percy was at the time. There are allegations he was in Adelaide, staying with his parents in a caravan park. The bus to and from Wenzel's went past West Beach Caravan Park. This bus was always crowded in school holidays and l could never have described anyone on it. Percy had a thing about sand and water. The park was surrounded by sandhills at the time; in fact as children we were forbidden from going there as no-one would hear us if we drowned. Uncannily similar to Wanda Beach.
* l would like to know where Robert Lowe was at the time. Strangely there is a gap between his sordid offences in NZ in 65 and Australia in 69. This physcopath has possibly the greatest propensity of all to commit a crime like this.
* Arthur Brown? The suspect who by far most likely resembles identikits. Who knows?
* And then there is the sordid convicted South Australian murderer of two children, Dieter Pfennig. His name is not suppressed and details of his convictions are freely available.

So my theory is this, for what it's worth, given lots of knowledge of the situations and places on the day. The purchases and subsequent grappling they would have entailed didn't happen or someone would have noticed. The kids just bought their own lunch and a pasty for mum. Maybe they were rascals and bought buns too and decided walk home, or just missed the bus. I think either way, they walked. They just followed the bus route. Grant was just four years old. Before long, he would have cried in the heat and Jane would have looked after him. So from a house comes a friendly man, maybe someone they've met before, maybe not, but probably. "You kids look thirsty, come in for a drink and l think l've got an ice-cream brick. We'll be quick".
All too easy. I think we are over-thinking.
I believe the children were enticed and taken somewhere between Wenzels and their home, and this is where they remain.
Sorry for such a long post, but after 54 years of thought over this mystery, my theory is just the same as it was in 1966.

 

[johnymac1]

This is my first post on this thread. I have followed this case since the day it began and have taken a particular interest in it all my life.

I was born and raised very close to Glenelg and l and my 2 siblings at the time were of similar age to the children. Accompanied by our mother, we frequented the area often and knew the locale very well including bus routes, landmarks, short cuts etc. At this time there was a bus which ran between Port Adelaide and Glenelg, it's primary route being near to the foreshore nearly all the way. When on it's way to the bay, it terminated outside Wenzels. It ran hourly on week days and Australia Day that year was not a public holiday. We caught it frequently and my family had been at "the bay", as we called it, two days earlier. It was incredibly busy with kids everywhere and we bought lunch at Wenzels, as we always did. The queues, crowds and chaos in this shop at lunchtime during school holidays would be unforgettable for South Australians who went there in those days.

As a kid, teenager and young adult, l became almost obsessed at times with trying to discover the fate of the children. I absorbed every scrap of information l could find. I still don't miss much.
But l'm confused in recent years, unless l've somehow missed something. I would like to know when, how and from which source came the information that the children bought enough food and drinks for six people? This seems to now be the basis of so many theories! For at least 30 years, it was reported the children just bought their own lunch, plus a pasty for their mother. I accept that the denomination they allegedly used to pay could have been confused over time, as I believe the police deliberately witheld certain information.

So are we going to believe the children bought multiple lunches or not, and base our theories on this? We need to explore several known facts first, from 1966:-
* There were no white plastic bags then, just brown paper bags. You brought your own string bag if you needed a few things from the shop.
* Pies, pasties and cakes were sold one to a bag, the pies etc. being much bigger than they are now. Mingy shopkeepers would try to squash two in and break them.
* There were absolutely no plastic bottles in 1966. All soft drinks then were in thickened, green tinted glass, with the bottle weighing more than the drink. When l was Jane's age, my six year old brother and l were allowed to walk 400m to the local shop every Friday afternoon to bring home two big bottles of Coke and Woodies in a string bag. They were bloody heavy!
* All bottles in those days required bottle openers.
* The airline bag Jane was carrying had only one over-shoulder handle.

* And another verifiable fact:- the Beaumont children were carrying either on their person or with them 15-17 items before they bought anything.

So picture this. Children enter shop, Jane carrying her bag, probably containing whatever they weren't wearing. They would've had at least one wet towel, although some reports state they had no towels. The kids are served all this food (according to recent reports six p & ps and six buns or something?). So that's six bags if it's just p & ps. Add another six bags if buns are involved = 12 bags. At best if two items in each bag = 6 bags. Then come the soft drinks as described above. So the kids are now grappling with 12 paper bags, minimum 6, plus 2 bloody heavy bottles, armed only with one airways bag and at least one wet towel. How can this be? Grant could have carried very little.
How could three kids grappling with all that food and drink possibly go un-noticed by potential witnesses? If the shop assistant truly remembered serving them, how did she hand it all over to the children and where did they put it? Surely the latter should have been more memorable than other details?
My theory, for what it's worth, is just that the children were served quickly amongst a big crowd and bought their own lunch, which they could carry and had probably half-eaten before they squeezed out of the shop. Or perhaps, just perhaps, they decided to treat themselves to a finger bun each and walk home. The fare and a bun each would've been the same. I think their presence in the shop went almost unnoticed.
I don't believe we should be basing all our theories on one memory in one cake shop, but yes, definitely to eye-witnesses on the reserve. I think we need to accept that. The postie? I'm not sure. And exactly what time did the children catch the bus from home. Was it 8.45 or 10?
* l have met the McIntyres on two occasions in my efforts to delve into this. They are very convincing and seemingly authentic. Goodness knows why they would carp on for so long about this. Who knows?
* Munro, Satin Man? All of them totally sick, but a sudden progression to triple murder after years of successfully and sordidly dabbling in fetishes and abuse? Who knows?
* Police conspiracy? Who knows?
* l would like to know where Derek Percy was at the time. There are allegations he was in Adelaide, staying with his parents in a caravan park. The bus to and from Wenzel's went past West Beach Caravan Park. This bus was always crowded in school holidays and l could never have described anyone on it. Percy had a thing about sand and water. The park was surrounded by sandhills at the time; in fact as children we were forbidden from going there as no-one would hear us if we drowned. Uncannily similar to Wanda Beach.
* l would like to know where Robert Lowe was at the time. Strangely there is a gap between his sordid offences in NZ in 65 and Australia in 69. This physcopath has possibly the greatest propensity of all to commit a crime like this.
* Arthur Brown? The suspect who by far most likely resembles identikits. Who knows?
* And then there is the sordid convicted South Australian murderer of two children, Dieter Pfennig. His name is not suppressed and details of his convictions are freely available.

So my theory is this, for what it's worth, given lots of knowledge of the situations and places on the day. The purchases and subsequent grappling they would have entailed didn't happen or someone would have noticed. The kids just bought their own lunch and a pasty for mum. Maybe they were rascals and bought buns too and decided walk home, or just missed the bus. I think either way, they walked. They just followed the bus route. Grant was just four years old. Before long, he would have cried in the heat and Jane would have looked after him. So from a house comes a friendly man, maybe someone they've met before, maybe not, but probably. "You kids look thirsty, come in for a drink and l think l've got an ice-cream brick. We'll be quick".
All too easy. I think we are over-thinking.
I believe the children were enticed and taken somewhere between Wenzels and their home, and this is where they remain.
Sorry for such a long post, but after 54 years of thought over this mystery, my theory is just the same as it was in 1966.

I like your theory

 

[bluegirlz]

I dont believe there is but I support a dig there

I assume you have the parameters of the dig mapped out? There will be no '' oops we dug in the wrong spot?''

AM is certain of where the bodies are?

I just dont want another Castalloy where argument rages about the wrong spot being dug. Settle it once and once and for all. I think thats fair on all parties

Which would be exactly the plan! One of the siblings (owner of property) has said to me in a fb thread that they have no issue with it happening! They had a quote but told me to do the ground work, so i am, to do so obviously the areas need to be identified to form that quote. Then we crowd fund. There is plenty of people backing the dig & interest is growing rapidly!

As with you i would not want a bullz up like castalloys was that was poor.

In my opinion stansbury is a viable location, given all the connections, associations & paedo links, they gave the same reasoning for the castalloys dig.

 

[bluegirlz]

This is what people have been told in mainstream press. They cannot reasonably be accused of being unsupportive or flamed for questioning the validity of the claims.

Max McIntyre, a former Telecom worker, was investigated over the disappearance after one of his daughters, Ruth Collins, made the allegations back in 2007.

Police found no evidence he was involved.

Munro, who lived in Glenelg in 1966, was interviewed about the Beaumonts after he was arrested for the abuse of other boys last year. Again, police found no evidence.

Police said the claims about Max McIntyre were extensively investigated and cannot be supported. There was nothing to implicate Munro either, they said.

"Police have undertaken many actions and lines of inquiries in relation to this matter ... there is no evidence at all to support these claims," the police spokeswoman said.

Boy's diary puts paedophile near beach when Beaumont children disappeared

Diary that ties convicted paedophile to Beaumont children's disappearance handed to police.

www.smh.com.au

See, heres my thing, IF police did actually ‘extensively investigate’ ruths 2007 allegations, they would have a clear picture of his ‘mates’ & who they are & what they were associated with, & what theyve been convicted of, which are grounds to be a suspect standing on that fact alone. a note to make max did phone tapping on bookies..who was a bookie in adel & convicted peado? - Robert Symonds.

so IF they investigated, where was munro for the day? What was his alibi & WHO (important point) can back it up?

Also when brian littley did the interviews with max, max did say things that raise more speculation. Why would max say the Things he did, like munro did it, so cops have max (on vid) suggesting munro & ruth as well but they still dismiss it?

 

[Kurve]

So are we going to believe the children bought multiple lunches or not, and base our theories on this? We need to explore several known facts first, from 1966:-
* There were no white plastic bags then, just brown paper bags. You brought your own string bag if you needed a few things from the shop.
* Pies, pasties and cakes were sold one to a bag, the pies etc. being much bigger than they are now. Mingy shopkeepers would try to squash two in and break them.
* There were absolutely no plastic bottles in 1966. All soft drinks then were in thickened, green tinted glass, with the bottle weighing more than the drink. When l was Jane's age, my six year old brother and l were allowed to walk 400m to the local shop every Friday afternoon to bring home two big bottles of Coke and Woodies in a string bag. They were bloody heavy!
* All bottles in those days required bottle openers.
* The airline bag Jane was carrying had only one over-shoulder handle.

Agree, there's been a few suggestions in here that the kids were seen back at Colley's Reserve after they were in Wenzels which is contrary to what I'd initially thought. I couldn't imagine them lugging all that food back to the reserve and not be seen either eating or carrying it. So I brought a book which arrived today, by Alan J Whitaker whose sources include South Australia Police.

The last confirmed sighting of them was inside Wenzels and that's always been the official police line. On their purchase, they asked for one lunch to be placed in a separate bag. That would be for mum imo.

The postman's recall was unreliable. It's thought he did see them but earlier in the day before they went into Wenzels, not later.

To Derek Percy, he did admit to one investigator that he was on Glenelg that day but he was a rambling lunatic and nothing he said made sense at that time. Certifiably insane. He was also thought to be too young without license or car and didn't match the description of the man in his thirties with according to witnesses, 'blonde' 'fairish light brown' hair.

There were also a lot of empty houses in Glenelg apparently at the time which was interesting information and may fit with your theory.

 

[DropBearess]

The children were never at Colley Reserve though, at any time, so they couldn't have been seen back there. There have been lots of misunderstandings about the na

Agree, there's been a few suggestions in here that the kids were seen back at Colley's Reserve after they were in Wenzels which is contrary to what I'd initially thought. I couldn't imagine them lugging all that food back to the reserve and not be seen either eating or carrying it. So I brought a book which arrived today, by Alan J Whitaker whose sources include South Australia Police.

The last confirmed sighting of them was inside Wenzels and that's always been the official police line. On their purchase, they asked for one lunch to be placed in a separate bag. That would be for mum imo.

The postman's recall was unreliable. It's thought he did see them but earlier in the day before they went into Wenzels, not later.

To Derek Percy, he did admit to one investigator that he was on Glenelg that day but he was a rambling lunatic and nothing he said made sense at that time. Certifiably insane. He was also thought to be too young without license or car and didn't match the description of the man in his thirties with according to witnesses, 'blonde' 'fairish light brown' hair.

There were also a lot of empty houses in Glenelg apparently at the time which was interesting information and may fit with your theory.

 

[Kurve]

The children were never at Colley Reserve though, at any time, so they couldn't have been seen back there. There have been lots of misunderstandings about the na

What makes you think they were never at Colley Reserve? If they were never there, that really throws the witnesses narrative right off.

 

[DropBearess]

The children were never at Colley Reserve though, at any time, so they couldn't have been seen back there. There have been lots of misunderstandings about the name of the l

The children were never at Colley Reserve though, at any time, so they couldn't have been seen back there. There have been lots of misunderstandings about the name of the locality where they were last seen, benc

What makes you think they were never at Colley Reserve? If they were never there, that really throws the witnesses narrative right off.

Sorry for the prematurely sent half-message. I'm in an area prone to sudden drop-outs and reliant on phone. There have been many misunderstandings over the years about where the children were last reliably seen. It was not Colley Reserve. Any attempts to reconcile this location on google to chart their movements will be befuddling and will muddy the waters. The children were last seen playing on lawns in front of the Glenelg Life Saving Club around 400 mtrs away. This is fact. I have read Alan Whittaker"s book twice. Lots of inaccuracies unfortunately .

 

[Kurve]

Sorry for the prematurely sent half-message. I'm in an area prone to sudden drop-outs and reliant on phone. There have been many misunderstandings over the years about where the children were last reliably seen. It was not Colley Reserve. Any attempts to reconcile this location on google to chart their movements will be befuddling and will muddy the waters. The children were last seen playing on lawns in front of the Glenelg Life Saving Club around 400 mtrs away. This is fact. I have read Alan Whittaker"s book twice. Lots of inaccuracies unfortunately .

Okay, that's alright. So you're saying they weren't last seen in Wenzel's and do you have anything to confirm the last sighting was at the Glenelg Life Saving Club?

I'll stick with the book for now and see how it pans out, skipping the Croiset chapter.

 

[DropBearess]

Okay, that's alright. So you're saying they weren't last seen in Wenzel's and do you have anything to confirm the last sighting was at the Glenelg Life Saving Club?

I'll stick with the book for now and see how it pans out, skipping the Croiset chapter.

Sorry again. I meant when they were last seen playing on lawns, it was in front of GLSC. They weren't on Colley Reserve at any time. There are several witness reports of them being near GSLC ebefore the bakery, but none after.

 

[Oksrus]

Sorry again. I meant when they were last seen playing on lawns, it was in front of GLSC. They weren't on Colley Reserve at any time. There are several witness reports of them being near GSLC ebefore the bakery, but none after.

 

[Oksrus]

I always understood Colley Reserve runs from Anzac Highway to Mosely Square.
The GLSC in on the beachside of Colley Reserve. It is a supposition of mine that the children may have been told to swim at the club for safety reasons.