Remove this Banner Ad

Unsolved The Beaumont Children

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

DropBearess said:
I have a question which has perplexed me for many years. It seems to have no definitive answer.

What time did the children actually catch the bus to Glenelg? Was it 8.45 am or 10 am? I have read everything I can find over the years with all sources coming in 50/50. The original, handwritten police report says 8.45. Mrs. B also stated 8.45, yet other reports claim she said 10 am. We have a bus driver and his passenger claiming 8.45 and others saying they were wrong. We have old newspapers and new books differing.

I think the time frame is very important. 10 am allowed the children around 90 mins at the beach after trip times and buying lunches. 8.45 am allowed them nearly 3 hours. I also dare to wonder if there could have been an 'elephant in the room' which may account for vague departure times and expected return times.

What time do you all think the children departed and why do you think this? What are your sources for your thoughts?
Click to expand...
From wiki and I thought this is the official story as well

if they could visit Glenelg Beach again. As it was too hot to walk, they took a five-minute, three-kilometre bus journey from their home to the beach.[13] They caught the bus at 8:45 am and were expected to return home on the 12:00 noon bus.[14]: 37 [15]
 
I hadnt considered the implications of the following

On 25 January 1966, in the midst of a summer heatwave, Jim dropped the children off at Glenelg Beach before heading off on a three-day sales trip to Snowtown.[11]

, and when Jim returned home early from his trip around 3:00 pm, he immediately drove to the crowded beach.

A 3 day trip suddenly shortened to the day they went missing?? What are the implications of this?
 
GreyCrow said:
I hadnt considered the implications of the following

On 25 January 1966, in the midst of a summer heatwave, Jim dropped the children off at Glenelg Beach before heading off on a three-day sales trip to Snowtown.[11]

, and when Jim returned home early from his trip around 3:00 pm, he immediately drove to the crowded beach.

A 3 day trip suddenly shortened to the day they went missing?? What are the implications of this?
Click to expand...
Not sure if the trip was shortened to the day the kids went missing. Rather Jim drove to Snowtown on the first day of the planned 3 day Trip and his client had cancelled it for whatever reason. Bit Odd still
 
Last edited:
DropBearess said:
I have a question which has perplexed me for many years. It seems to have no definitive answer.

What time did the children actually catch the bus to Glenelg? Was it 8.45 am or 10 am? I have read everything I can find over the years with all sources coming in 50/50. The original, handwritten police report says 8.45. Mrs. B also stated 8.45, yet other reports claim she said 10 am. We have a bus driver and his passenger claiming 8.45 and others saying they were wrong. We have old newspapers and new books differing.

I think the time frame is very important. 10 am allowed the children around 90 mins at the beach after trip times and buying lunches. 8.45 am allowed them nearly 3 hours. I also dare to wonder if there could have been an 'elephant in the room' which may account for vague departure times and expected return times.

What time do you all think the children departed and why do you think this? What are your sources for your thoughts?
Click to expand...
There are 6 apparent "witnesses" that i'm aware of.

1) Nancy Beaumont - and i haven't seen the original press report - is said to have confirmed, a few days after the abduction, that they left at 8:35 - seems to give them plenty of time to make the 8:45 bus.

2) The neighbour across the road, who asked "where's your bikini Nancy?" should have been able to confirm the time, or otherwise. (The Missing Beaumont Children - Michael Madigan)

3) The friend Nancy visited after finishing housework at 10. May add additional confirmation that they went to the bus stop well before 10. (The Missing Beaumont Children - Michael Madigan)

4) Darlington man who called The News to describe his wife's account of the kids on the 8:45 bus. The wife, a cub leader starting a new job in Glenelg at 9, describes the little boy putting his hand out of the window, the oldest sister scolding him, then walking to the back of the bus to read her book (on a 5 minute bus trip). No bus driver to confirm any of this. Doesn't appear to have been reported to police, the witness may not have spoken to anyone else. We don't really know if she even existed. Cubs personnel around Darlington at the time might be really interesting, or entirely irrelevant. (The Missing Beaumont Children - Michael Madigan)

5) Ian Munro, driver of the 10:10 bus, remembered the kids getting on, but can't remember when or where they got off the bus. (various news sources) He died 10 years ago, so there's another lost opportunity.

6) Jane's friend Jenny, not on either bus, described previous trips she'd been on with the kids, particularly describing the way Jane helped Grant down the steps, holding him to her hip. Which should have made their departure fairly noticeable, unless it was a routine Ian was so used to that he'd stopped noticing. (edit:S____ M___ toilet paper series)

There's more detail on the 8:45 description, but sounds more like someone who's observed the kids in a less confined, brief-trip setting. No mention of how busy the bus was, but Jane wandering off to the back of the bus seems inconsistent with descriptions from people who knew her best. Either the best witness or a probable suspect.

Witness accounts at the beach don't appear to exist before 11am (depending on when Tom Patterson actually saw them). That leaves a gap of either ~50 minutes or a little over 2 hours where they seem to have gone entirely unseen.

I don't think either bus witness was satisfactory (allowing for the fact that police might have far more detail than has been disclosed) and generally agree with Ray Kelly's reasoning that an abductor wouldn't attract attention asking about stolen money, so consider option 3 (or some variant) - someone they knew, possibly the father of Jane's "boyfriend", saw them at the bus stop, picked them up, took them to see his son (and possibly other siblings/new friends) who couldn't go out in that heat, dropped them at the beach, parked his car, got changed, laid on the grass, played with them a while, noticed money missing, tried to find the stolen money, dropped them back at/near the bus stop, where the Adelaide Oval sketch came to life, showing them a cat running under/behind an unoccupied house (last week of school holidays, and one house likely vacant after the owner's death 6 months earlier, next door had a boy Jane's age, so the absence of bus stop witnesses suggests they were away, too) - and whatever happened from there was horrific.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

johnymac1 said:
Unfortunately, knowledge is Caped. The Police have been so stingy in what they have released to us.

I don't think anyone is close to solving it, If you have a POI in mind, it's incredibly difficult to prove it
Click to expand...
It really seems to be the perfect crime. I agree, if more information was released, we may be able to link to a POI. I think they released general information and the public adds the details. Maybe this puts a poi in or out. It really is difficult to even find information or people that may help solve the puzzle.
Also, if you are going to make a police report - one they will actually take serious, you would have to spell out, their background, connections to Glenelg, proximity to Glenelg, what makes the person a suspect, physical appearance, age. Someone extremely confident, cocky, and the ability to seemingly groom/manipulate three children. Attracted to both sexes. Be able to take them away from the beach with no apparent child distress, Don't forget to add in a motive and animals.
 
Lyn said:
It really seems to be the perfect crime. I agree, if more information was released, we may be able to link to a POI. I think they released general information and the public adds the details. Maybe this puts a poi in or out. It really is difficult to even find information or people that may help solve the puzzle.
Also, if you are going to make a police report - one they will actually take serious, you would have to spell out, their background, connections to Glenelg, proximity to Glenelg, what makes the person a suspect, physical appearance, age. Someone extremely confident, cocky, and the ability to seemingly groom/manipulate three children. Attracted to both sexes. Be able to take them away from the beach with no apparent child distress, Don't forget to add in a motive and animals.
Click to expand...
have you tried so far Lyn or are you still collating as much evidence as possible before approaching anyone at sapol?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

squawk said:
If the sink hole property is part owned by Simone McIntyre then she has implied online that she is willing to allow a dig there. Not sure about the other sibling’s views or any conditions she/they may impose though.
Click to expand...
In one of the Beaumont threads, Danny the other sibling was commenting here on BF. This was a while ago, maybe earlier in this thread. All of them had a say over the years, also a dude who was tight with Pike, Munroe and ole Maxie.
You would imagine the Stansbury Clan would want to finally clear it up! Over on FB, every follower of RV is blindly saying dig up Stansbury. Thats what triggered Cossie to chime in.
If they let it go ahead, it will finally get the monkey off their chest! Hopefully Cossie will debunk the theory for us!
 
JimmyBC said:
Why do I get the feeling Stansbury could be another you didn't dig in the right spot scenario.
Click to expand...
Maybe running a GPR over the spot first would help.
They have come down in price, I was thinking about buying one. I have hired them from time to time.
Unfortunately, the areas I'm testing are sand dunes and very uneven surfaces. I do already own metal detectors.
I want to run a GPR over the dunes at Port Noarlunga and the dunes at the old Minda Site at Hove.
 
johnymac1 said:
Maybe running a GPR over the spot first would help.
They have come down in price, I was thinking about buying one. I have hired them from time to time.
Unfortunately, the areas I'm testing are sand dunes and very uneven surfaces. I do already own metal detectors.
I want to run a GPR over the dunes at Port Noarlunga and the dunes at the old Minda Site at Hove.
Click to expand...
Hi mate. They tried GPRs in US or Canada and were convinced they found a huge grave of children. It wasn't, they're not as wonderful as people think. I think they have given up using them to continue searching.
Minelab worked on one, sheesh I recall maybe 20yrs ago for handheld detecting but it just wasn't reliable enough with it's calls over non targets to real ones.
All they're good at is anomalies and even then not 100%. They'll find ghost shapes too.
 
Excavating a sink hole is not as easy as it seems. Often, they are connected to a cave system. And some systems may be partially or fully under the water table.
The Stansbury area was inhabited by the Narungga people. Excavators may come across areas of significance to the original landowners. From the vision Ch7 showed me, Max was aware of First nations presence on his property.
 
Jon# said:
Hi mate. They tried GPRs in US or Canada and were convinced they found a huge grave of children. It wasn't, they're not as wonderful as people think. I think they have given up using them to continue searching.
Minelab worked on one, sheesh I recall maybe 20yrs ago for handheld detecting but it just wasn't reliable enough with it's calls over non targets to real ones.
All they're good at is anomalies and even then not 100%. They'll find ghost shapes too.
Click to expand...
from what I understand of Max's sinkhole, He put something solid over the top of it. The GPR would be to detect that object, not so much any remains. I've tried one to look through a slab, could not see anything to warrant digging it up.
 
What if they get to Stansbury and find nothing, will be Massive egg on the face of all involved. Still swear they will find something.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Macca180 said:
The perfect crime for that era. But most likely just luck combined with the era committed.

It would be the perfect crime if it was pulled off in 2025.
ZERO chance anyone gets away with it today.
Click to expand...
I think the weirdos probably focus on isolated areas these days, if someone tried abducting kids on a popular beach now chances are it would be caught in the background while someone was vlogging lol.
 
Last edited:
JimmyBC said:
I think the weirdos probably focus on isolated areas these days, if someone tried abducting kids on a popular beach now chances are it would be caught in the background while someone was vlogging lol.
Click to expand...
A lot of police investigative work involves sitting around waiting for tip-offs and info from the general public. Yes, it would be harder to get away with it today. Much harder. And police will often tell you that people frequently ‘get away with it’ simply due to sheer luck, and nothing more. They are not criminal geniuses or masterminds.
 
JimmyBC said:
I think the weirdos probably focus on isolated areas these days, if someone tried abducting kids on a popular beach now chances are it would be caught in the background while someone was vlogging lol.
Click to expand...
I was at Glenelg beach a few years ago and there was a solo dude filming girls on the beach. Modern cameras have even bigger screens nowadays. Passers-by could see what he was videoing. Glenelg beach remains a gathering place for all of Adelaide's pervs and crazies, I'm afraid to say.
 
A number of people in this thread have reasonably asked what the organisers of the recent Castalloy dig will conclude from an outcome that yielded no new evidence.

This was posted today. Interestingly, the image includes another image, showing the cover of the book previously released by the organisers of the dig (see the bottom left corner).

Is this all about self promotion, or not?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0171.jpeg
    IMG_0171.jpeg
    428.5 KB · Views: 43

Remove this Banner Ad

Unsolved The Beaumont Children

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top