Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates

[tapdancingbear]

Am I missing something?

Why have you included a Commonwealth link?

No lawyer would be bold (or foolish) enough to have the gall to ask for one for such an offence. The police would almost certainly object to even if that application was made 10 years later.

Not 100% sure , but I think because of his age at the time , that he met his conditions and that he was not on a sex offenders register he would have got it … in WA you don't need a lawyer to do it , you can do it yourself

 

[Tundrawolf]

The Spent Convictions Act 1988 would suggest that "the nature and seriousness of the offence" would take it out of the equation.

 

[BlueE]

There is no way a conviction of that nature would be declared Spent.

I think the conversation was about how Bre could get a WWC.

Simple answer is because he held most of the positions in the Little Aths Club he could easily tick himself of saying he sighted his own WWC when he didn't even apply.

 

[browncow]

He didn't forget he didn't intend. He couldn't very well say to his friends I am off to do a special project on Friday 15th in Claremont could he? Pre planned to perfection. Made up excuse of getting it together with ex not thinking he would ever be caught out. From his birthdate 98 days add 157 degrees is 255 Sarah's birthdate and connected to 3 victim's and his own birthdate.

Surely if he had this masterful, elaborate super plan mapped out ahead of time, all based around specific dates, even to the point of knowing his victims birth dates etc etc etc, he would have had Friday 15th mapped out well ahead of time?

But instead of telling his friends, hey I’m busy that night he instead agrees to meet with them?

The fact he had plans which involved anybody else totally goes against any theory of some master plan based on numbers/dates.

I mean we are talking about the same guy who tried to attack a female at his place of work and who ‘allegedly’ ran around breaking into houses with underwear on his head.

 

[Coastie19]

Remembering he was also convicted of Common assault. Whilst he was likely supervised on Probation as a sexually motivated offence, this will not likely make a register. Flag on his police file and intel no doubt.

A lot of states, including here in Qld do not have an actual sex offender register. All states have ANCOR which are for offences commited against children only

 

[GreyCrow]

Am I missing something?

Why have you included a Commonwealth link?

No lawyer would be bold (or foolish) enough to have the gall to ask for one for such an offence. The police would almost certainly object to even if that application was made 10 years later.

What was he charged with?

 

[Kurve]

What was he charged with?

Common assault but the reading shows sentencing is taken into consideration on determining the seriousness of the charge and while the size of the fine and length of prison term looks to be the difference on the face of it, mandatory completion of a sex offenders course probably wouldn't be ignored. imo.

 

[GreyCrow]

Common assault but the reading shows sentencing is taken into consideration on determining the seriousness of the charge and while the size of the fine and length of prison term looks to be the difference on the face of it, mandatory completion of a sex offenders course probably wouldn't be ignored. imo.

Was it mandatory or voluntarily

 

[Kurve]

Was it mandatory or voluntarily

If voluntary, would certainly put a different spin on things regards his character. Quite sure I read it was mandatory but I'd have to go back and check. On court records though would it matter either way? If voluntary it's an admission of the intent to more than a common assault.

 

[GreyCrow]

The point is in 1990 and even 2000 standard criminal background checks only took into account offences back 10 years.

Travel overseas to some countries was different but that was rare.

Based on a charge of common assault a CBC may not have shown the charge .

Belmont little aths either didn't ask for one, or volunteers weren't required to get one until much later than 2000.

 

[GreyCrow]

If voluntary, would certainly put a different spin on things regards his character. Quite sure I read it was mandatory but I'd have to go back and check. On court records though would it matter either way? If voluntary it's an admission of the intent to more than a common assault.

Voluntary can be seen as a recognition of an issue but cannot be seen as an admission

 

[Kurve]

Voluntary can be seen as a recognition of an issue but cannot be seen as an admission

He's even more daft than I'd thought then. Why would anybody put his hand up for a sex offenders course tied into and on the tail of a common assault? He's marked right there with that whether Telstra let him keep his job or not, whether he was never looked at again or came under attention for anything else until his latest arrest.

 

[Kurve]

I think the conversation was about how Bre could get a WWC.

Simple answer is because he held most of the positions in the Little Aths Club he could easily tick himself of saying he sighted his own WWC when he didn't even apply.

Somewhere in this big thread I have suggested I had a suspicion the police might find fraud in his background, more specifically some kind of identity fraud. Just a hunch or intuition, nothing yet but it's still early days.

That doesn't mean he used another name on a police clearance anywhere but he might have doctored docs.

 

[Coastie19]

The charge may have been higher when first charged, then through negotiations pled to the lesser on the condition he did Probation with the sexual offending course. Not the biggest fan of charges being downgraded, but might have been something Police were willing to do.


(1) Higher charge eg Sexual assault - Penalty a hefty fine and dont know what he does after court as that's all there is
(2) Lesser charge with Probation/course and someone keeping an eye on him for a while

(1) Has it's benefits depending on police computers at the time as they could have potentially drawn his name from people with a sexual charge in their history.

Which is why (2) has its drawbacks as the system back then may have missed his name based on the offence title when they ran checks for convicted sex offenders

 

[Coastie19]

Fraudsters and sex offenders are quite similar in nature. Have limited to no criminal history, work, are groomers of their victims, are compliant with supervision and are notoriously hand shakers.

BRE doesn't strike me so much as typical sex offender though as above, based on his rush attack MO although could have been if doing any luring....

 

[tapdancingbear]

A couple of years ago there was a debate elsewhere re Police Clearances / Working With Children clearances at Little Athletics … someone who was involved with LA came into the conversation and said they were not required at the time the accused got involved

Ive coached kids in Basketball and Boxing at PCYCs and was never asked for a police clearance … Police and Citizens Youth Clubs

Even if they were required , those have been involved in their kids sport , how often is some official away and a parent is asked or volunteers to step in , that happens a couple of times and the parent is part of the furniture , its normal to see them there, and everyone assumes they are a good guy

It will be happening somewhere this weekend with all the checks in the world in place

 

[Badge666]

Somewhere in this big thread I have suggested I had a suspicion the police might find fraud in his background, more specifically some kind of identity fraud. Just a hunch or intuition, nothing yet but it's still early days.

That doesn't mean he used another name on a police clearance anywhere but he might have doctored docs.

Yes. After the Hollywood Hospital event in 1990 which must have caused all sorts of grief for him( and how he kept his job is still a yet to be explained mystery) he would have had to be absolutely ****ing stupid beyond belief to be cruising around Claremont asking girls if they wanted a lift home and telling them he worked for Telstra if he planned to assault them. Absolutely beggars belief. If he is getting up to no good driving that late model white car surely he is trying to pass himself off as security, a taxi, or perhaps even a cop.?

 

[Badge666]

A very interesting poster on these internet forums prior to arrest speculated that the Claremont girls were killed " Halal Style" and that the killer impersonated a cop/ He was right about the former....

 

[Badge666]

In regards to the ' item " clothing ?? utilised by Telstra Technicians that has been the cause of so much recent discussion I think hats , safety helmets , gloves etc may be ruled out. It has to be something of value , something you would keep in a cupboard shed or locker for twenty years and not throw out.
A jacket, coveralls, a heavy winter greatcoat..... some sort of memento maybe not even issued by or pilfered from Telstra...maybe from one of the major company they contracted to....
Still not game to have a stab at it.....

 

[Melsy]

It's not pathetic numbers crap. It's factual data that cannot be cast aside. If you and others cannot understand or comprehend how the accused may have used dates to calculate his 'horrendous game plan' to include every detail. The facts cannot be ignored. The fact that the disposal site degrees of Jane and Ciara add up to Ciara's birthdate cannot be ignored.

The fact that the birthdate of the accused and all three Claremont victims are connected to the 1st victim's birthdate cannot be ignored as the facts reveal the abductions were not opportunistic and shows the accused likely knew intimate details of each victim prior to their alleged abductions.

The night each young lady was abducted was not their 1st night attending the Claremont or Cottesloe venues. Note both Sarah and Jane were at the OBH in Cottesloe. The accused is alleged to have mentioned Cottesloe to one of the Telstra living witnesses and there are witnesses that place a Telstra vehicle cruising the streets adjacent to the OBH in 1996/1997 period.


It should be kept in mind Sarah lived in South Perth and Ciara actually lived in South Perth prior to her departure overseas in the 1st quarter of 1996. Ciara shared the flat with a female friend.

So Ciara may have been a regular at The Windsor prior her departure overseas.

 

[Melsy]

Did it rain when Jane went missing?

They stated the numbers fibres found at Janes site.

 

[ExitStrategy]

Regarding the new evidence/item of clothing, if the reason why it was only recently submitted was the difficulty in sourcing it then it may be an item with “old branding” on it and not in circulation anymore?
Was there a period where the logo changed/the company rebranded or the OHS uniform guidelines changed requiring the uniforms to be updated a few times within a small timeframe?

 

[ExitStrategy]

I considered the pits being used , after his arrest , I was more along the lines of ones that may have been out service/ no longer used … if there were any … they are concrete bunkers that would be good for hiding something you did not want found
But you raise an excellent point , the accused would not even have to hide in them , as long as he was in uniform he would be invisible because he should be there

I’ve often wondered if the reason SS hasn’t been found is because she was left in an old pit and he was unable to move her for some reason.

 

[Catcher In The Rye]

A couple of years ago there was a debate elsewhere re Police Clearances / Working With Children clearances at Little Athletics … someone who was involved with LA came into the conversation and said they were not required at the time the accused got involved

Ive coached kids in Basketball and Boxing at PCYCs and was never asked for a police clearance … Police and Citizens Youth Clubs

Even if they were required , those have been involved in their kids sport , how often is some official away and a parent is asked or volunteers to step in , that happens a couple of times and the parent is part of the furniture , its normal to see them there, and everyone assumes they are a good guy

It will be happening somewhere this weekend with all the checks in the world in place

The Working with Children Check Act 2004 was part of the Child Protection Act of 2004 which replaced the Child Welfare Act 1947.

In Western Australia and the Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) Islands, the Working with Children (WWC) Check is a compulsory screening strategy for people who engage in certain paid or unpaid work with children, described as “childrelated work” under the WWC Act.

The WWC Check is administered by the WWC Screening Unit of the Department for Child Protection and Family Support. In the sport and recreation industry, the WWC Check applies to many people who work with children in Western Australia and the Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) Islands including:

• Self-employed people;
• Paid employees;
• Volunteers and unpaid people; and
• Students on placement.

Employers, volunteer organisations and individuals have responsibilities to comply with the WWC Act and keep children safe in their organisations.

The WWC Check is only one strategy to keep children safe. There are many things your organisation can do to make sure it is child-safe and child-friendly.

This booklet has been developed to help your organisation meet its responsibilities under the WWC Act. It provides practical information, links and resources for your organisation to implement and maintain WWC Checks.

As usual more holes in it than a sieve. https://www.dsr.wa.gov.au/support-a...-sport/child-protection/working-with-children

 

[Catcher In The Rye]

Was it mandatory or voluntarily

If it was part of your sentence then it was mandatory and if you didn't do it you would be in breach and hauled back in for re sentencing