Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates

[zedx]

I wonder which of the below (if any) the defence might claim?

1. The kimono was stolen/taken from BRE's possession by whoever it was that attacked in EWH's Huntingdale dwelling or someone that passed it onto someone(s) else; or

2. BRE sold/gave/bartered the kimono to someone at a swap meat or the local watering hole/pond; or

3. BRE's nocturnal activities/fetishes included doing X-rated things on ppl's clothing without him actually removing the clothing/kimono from their backyard washing lines (particularly when he'd run out of sandwich bags), and that someone else must have taken/used the Kimono for use in the EWH dwelling attack; or

4. That there can't be 100% certainty that the DNA on the kimono was actually deposited on the Kimono before/during the EWH dwelling attack.
That the accused's DNA might have been deliberately placed on it by someone (i.e framed), at some point in the many years after the event before the kimono was found to have spermatozoa on it that was a DNA match with BRE.

Im more inclined the original line of attack will be to label the kimono as contaminated. they will assert that it was handled in a fashion that allowed cross contamination at the scene, it was then lost, when it was found it was then a period of time before the semen was discovered and tested, and compared to BRE. if this works then the kimono is shown to be useless and disregarded. if it doesn't work, next step is to distance bre from the kimono. either the "ive never seen it before your honour", the "that belonged to my girlfriend at the time and went missing" or even the classic "i had a random hookup with person x and left it at their house". the more believable the excuse to show that BRE had handled it at some stage but it was out of his possession by the time of the huntingdale attack, the better, as it goes towards reasonable doubt for the charge.

On a side note has it even been 100% confirmed where the kimono came from? someone could of said i had one like that which was stolen from my washing line, however that doesn't mean the kimono was theirs. if the kimono had someones name on the tag for instance, then that is a bit hard to refute.
[/QUOTE]
your right it is a worry contamination!! IIRC some where it has been stated the owner of the kimono has been located.

 

[zedx]

They could easily take the DNA from the cop away from any found on the kimono.

More strange was how they decided this semen stain was a clue to the brutal killing that had occurred the previous September (well before the kimono was stolen from the clothes line).

View attachment 763271

Agree, maybe they know something we don't know? otherwise I can't understand the connection!

 

[GreyCrow]

I agree - what made WAPOL think it was linked to a murder/killing previously. "please explain the link WAPOL"

Total F***up I think

Im more inclined the original line of attack will be to label the kimono as contaminated. they will assert that it was handled in a fashion that allowed cross contamination at the scene, it was then lost, when it was found it was then a period of time before the semen was discovered and tested, and compared to BRE. if this works then the kimono is shown to be useless and disregarded. if it doesn't work, next step is to distance bre from the kimono. either the "ive never seen it before your honour", the "that belonged to my girlfriend at the time and went missing" or even the classic "i had a random hookup with person x and left it at their house". the more believable the excuse to show that BRE had handled it at some stage but it was out of his possession by the time of the huntingdale attack, the better, as it goes towards reasonable doubt for the charge.

On a side note has it even been 100% confirmed where the kimono came from? someone could of said i had one like that which was stolen from my washing line, however that doesn't mean the kimono was theirs. if the kimono had someones name on the tag for instance, then that is a bit hard to refute.

Contamination and the Victoria Park murder should be enough for a good lawyer to at least raise reasonable doubt

 

[Likeamystery]

EWH owned the house
ALH was attacked

I highly doubt the 18 year old ALH that was attacked owned the family home.

I didn't know what depravation of liberty meant. I'm aware she lived in the family home with one or two parents.
I recall when the incident happened, the police did a door knock at the neighbours. Didn't say what it was about though.

 

[BlueE]

Contamination and the Victoria Park murder should be enough for a good lawyer to at least raise reasonable doubt

Thing is the guy confessed (Masters I think) while he was in a Qld prison for murder of a backpacker. Turns out he was living in one of the block of 8 one bedroom unites the victim was living in. However he had been "cleared" using some forensic evidence the cops had. It could have been he was the wrong blood type for what they found at the scene they never siad what they had but it was a brutal murder so cold assume they had plenty of evidence.

Strangely, the initial reports were they could be looking for a male and a female. Oh wait ... the thought just entered my head of the picture Shelly had of BRE.

Anyway just because someone confesses, it's not a strong enough reason to convict esp when "forensics" cleared him. I assume he must have had details of the crime only the killer could know. After 21 years (added to his initial 7) I think he's still inside.

However it would be interesting to test the blood and whatever else they had in this case to see if any matched the current accused.

 

[BlueE]

I didn't know what depravation of liberty meant. I'm aware she lived in the family home with one or two parents.
I recall when the incident happened, the police did a door knock at the neighbours. Didn't say what it was about though.

He lay on her, preventing her from moving.

He tried to assault her but was scared off when she screamed and I think they have only charged him with depriving her of her liberty because it should be easily proved.

 

[Likeamystery]

He lay on her, preventing her from moving.

He tried to assault her but was scared off when she screamed and I think they have only charged him with depriving her of her liberty because it should be easily proved.

At page 6 - I’ve re-read counts 1 & 2 and it’s clear to me now.

https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/e...b6b-827d-9a3296764715?unredactedVersion=False

 

[Kurve]

He lay on her, preventing her from moving.

He tried to assault her but was scared off when she screamed and I think they have only charged him with depriving her of her liberty because it should be easily proved.

There's also the knotted stockings (that I find more terrifying than anything else) he brought with him and left behind where there might be forensics on and we just haven't been told yet.

At the young age of 18/19yo he was an extremely dangerous predator, he's showed a level of sophistication there imo together with cutting of the telephone line that smacks of experience.

 

[Likeamystery]

There's also the knotted stockings (that I find more terrifying than anything else) he brought with him and left behind where there might be forensics on and we just haven't been told yet.

At the young age of 18/19yo he was an extremely dangerous predator, he's showed a level of sophistication there imo together with cutting of the telephone line that smacks of experience.

Perhaps he just thought things through in detail, got ideas from books or watched videos. Apparently some of these predators fantasize about what they'd like to do.

Within the houses he'd need to have known where the bedrooms were, thinking about it being dark inside the homes. quite possibly he spent time driving back and forth and figured where the female bedrooms were by the colour of the curtains or female ornaments etc.

As there were several people in the home he was very game or simply arrogant - perhaps he was desperate or liked the excitement. He's tall and should have been capable of getting a girl-friend but if he was socially awkward or a nerd he was probably quite frustrated.

 

[Kurve]

Perhaps he just thought things through in detail, got ideas from books or watched videos. Apparently some of these predators fantasize about what they'd like to do.

Within the houses he'd need to have known where the bedrooms were, thinking about it being dark inside the homes. quite possibly he spent time driving back and forth and figured where the female bedrooms were by the colour of the curtains or female ornaments etc.

As there were several people in the home he was very game or simply arrogant - perhaps he was desperate or liked the excitement. He's tall and should have been capable of getting a girl-friend but if he was socially awkward or a nerd he was probably quite frustrated.

Suspect here he was a peeping Tom first and he knew the layouts of the neighbourhood's houses by creeping around on foot. He was probably doing it from the age of 15yo or so and escalating. Peeping to snowdropping to breaking into houses when nobody is at home to when they are at home. And he did that at least twice.

Then the kimono featured in the local press as possibly being connected to a murder in a nearby suburb. It might have been that which gave him such a fright he stopped but iirc there was one more attack after the one where he left the kimono behind?

Something else made him stop. There's a suggestion he met his first wife, I'm not convinced yet that was it I'd like to know when his first visit to a psychiatrist was and why and whether he was medicated.

 

[Redacted]

There's also the knotted stockings (that I find more terrifying than anything else) he brought with him and left behind where there might be forensics on and we just haven't been told yet.

At the young age of 18/19yo he was an extremely dangerous predator, he's showed a level of sophistication there imo together with cutting of the telephone line that smacks of experience.

The word you're looking for is garrote.

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[Girlnextdoor]

Suspect here he was a peeping Tom first and he knew the layouts of the neighbourhood's houses by creeping around on foot. He was probably doing it from the age of 15yo or so and escalating. Peeping to snowdropping to breaking into houses when nobody is at home to when they are at home. And he did that at least twice.

Then the kimono featured in the local press as possibly being connected to a murder in a nearby suburb. It might have been that which gave him such a fright he stopped but iirc there was one more attack after the one where he left the kimono behind?

Something else made him stop. There's a suggestion he met his first wife, I'm not convinced yet that was it I'd like to know when his first visit to a psychiatrist was and why and whether he was medicated.

You are so right Shelly about the psych and meds, would be fascinating to know. And I think all was probably thought to be OK with meeting "nice girl" and settling down all the "nasty stuff" would go away and BRE would slip quietly into a normal life, no meds or docs required, perhaps? People believe what they WANT to believe and everyone would want to believe all is AOK now.

 

[Likeamystery]

Suspect here he was a peeping Tom first and he knew the layouts of the neighbourhood's houses by creeping around on foot. He was probably doing it from the age of 15yo or so and escalating. Peeping to snowdropping to breaking into houses when nobody is at home to when they are at home. And he did that at least twice.

Then the kimono featured in the local press as possibly being connected to a murder in a nearby suburb. It might have been that which gave him such a fright he stopped but iirc there was one more attack after the one where he left the kimono behind?

Something else made him stop. There's a suggestion he met his first wife, I'm not convinced yet that was it I'd like to know when his first visit to a psychiatrist was and why and whether he was medicated.

Being medicated makes good sense, especially if he was living with his parents. It’s possible they were aware he had a problem and sought help.

Could it be that throughout life he has continuously fought an urge to commit an evil desire, or does he have what’s called triggers, seemingly once he’s rejected spirals out of control and does something evil to satisfy himself – satisfaction in the short-term.

Watching documentaries on Serial killers Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahma provides good insight into why these horrible people do the things they do. Ted Bundy committed different sorts of crimes, and throughout the killings was still a peeping tom. The peeping wasn’t just a progression.

Thinking of TB and Edgar Cook both these serial killers had a point in life when they started killing quite regularly – like something tipped them over and they went on a spree.

As an example, perhaps it’s a bit like being an alcoholic. The person fights the urge to have a drink, but something upsets them and they go on a binge and throughout life this cycle continues. They’re always a recovering alcoholic but not necessarily cured. Please excuse the alcoholic example it's only an example.

 

[Redacted]

Sorry BFew I should have just answered - No 4. looks feasible.

To clarify.
Need to know when the Kimono and other samples were tested for DNA.
Before or after the ex Telstra technician worked in the Exhibits storage facility handling all the evidence boxes?
If it was before, then chances of a Reasonable Doubt argument diminish, but if after, then it'd probably be almost impossible to prove that salting the sample couldn't of been possible IMO. Considering that the DPP has already considerately enough for the defence, presented evidence that the accused sperm was stored in sandwich bags providing the means to put up an argument of how the samples could've been salted, by someone who knew the accused, and maybe had a grudge against the accused.
It's up to the DPP to prove that it couldn't occur. All the defence has to do is establish reasonable doubt.
Remember what Justice Brian Martin said about improbability as an argument by the DPP when reasonable doubt about forensic evidence was raised by Mr Edwardson in the Rayney trial.

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

 

[Likeamystery]

To clarify.
Need to know when the Kimono and other samples were tested for DNA.
Before or after the ex Telstra technician worked in the Exhibits storage facility handling all the evidence boxes?
If it was before, then chances of a Reasonable Doubt argument diminish, but if after, then it'd probably be almost impossible to prove that salting the sample couldn't of been possible IMO. Considering that the DPP has already considerately enough for the defence, presented evidence that the accused sperm was stored in sandwich bags providing the means to put up an argument of how the samples could've been salted, by someone who knew the accused, and maybe had a grudge against the accused.
It's up to the DPP to prove that it couldn't occur. All the defence has to do is establish reasonable doubt.
Remember what Justice Brian Martin said about improbability as an argument by the DPP when reasonable doubt about forensic evidence was raised by Mr Edwardson in the Rayney trial.

Sent from my SM-A305YN using Tapatalk

Someone else mentioned a person working within the storage facility handling all the evidence boxes? I must have missed something.

 

[zedx]

https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/e...b6b-827d-9a3296764715?unredactedVersion=False

"In or about mid-January 1988, an apricot-coloured silk kimono and white women's underwear were stolen from a clothesline at 76 Harpenden Street, Huntingdale."

 

[metic]

https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/e...b6b-827d-9a3296764715?unredactedVersion=False

"In or about mid-January 1988, an apricot-coloured silk kimono and white women's underwear were stolen from a clothesline at 76 Harpenden Street, Huntingdale."

"He was described as being approximately 30 years of
age, 180 cm tall with short dark hair, of chubby or solid build and wearing a 'wrap around' garment. That garment was described as being
like a sarong or like what 'the Japanese wear' which was colourful and came 'down to his leg'.
40. Later the same morning, that is, on Thursday, 21 January 1988, at
approximately 4.10 am, a man broke into a residence at 61 Huntingdale
Road, Huntingdale and was found by the female occupant to be
standing in a spare bedroom of the house searching through drawers of
an antique dresser. The female occupant ran to her bedroom where she screamed for help. The man ran off. The man was described as
Caucasian, with a fair complexion, thin to average build, not muscly,
approximately 180 cm tall, aged between 19 and 21 years old, with
dark short hair which was in a neat short back and sides style, clean
shaven, brown eyes, black eyebrows, bare feet and clean in appearance.
The man was described as wearing a blue satin silky dressing gown or
nightwear which appeared to be quite feminine with white shorts with a
pattern on them."

 

[Likeamystery]

"He was described as being approximately 30 years of
age, 180 cm tall with short dark hair, of chubby or solid build and wearing a 'wrap around' garment. That garment was described as being
like a sarong or like what 'the Japanese wear' which was colourful and came 'down to his leg'.
40. Later the same morning, that is, on Thursday, 21 January 1988, at
approximately 4.10 am, a man broke into a residence at 61 Huntingdale
Road, Huntingdale and was found by the female occupant to be
standing in a spare bedroom of the house searching through drawers of
an antique dresser. The female occupant ran to her bedroom where she screamed for help. The man ran off. The man was described as
Caucasian, with a fair complexion, thin to average build, not muscly,
approximately 180 cm tall, aged between 19 and 21 years old, with
dark short hair which was in a neat short back and sides style, clean
shaven, brown eyes, black eyebrows, bare feet and clean in appearance.
The man was described as wearing a blue satin silky dressing gown or
nightwear which appeared to be quite feminine with white shorts with a
pattern on them."

With such a detailed description at 4.10am it would appear the woman turned on a light because she got a good look at him.

It makes me wonder if there were instances whereby he'd broken into a house and the woman didn't even wake up. Thinking he may have gone through drawers, standing at the bedside watching as they slept. It's possible.

He certainly wasn't quiet whilst rifling through the drawers because the women woke up. Perhaps he wanted them to wake up - adds to the terror or excitement, for him that is.

 

[zedx]

With such a detailed description at 4.10am it would appear the woman turned on a light because she got a good look at him.

It makes me wonder if there were instances whereby he'd broken into a house and the woman didn't even wake up. Thinking he may have gone through drawers, standing at the bedside watching as they slept. It's possible.

He certainly wasn't quiet whilst rifling through the drawers because the women woke up. Perhaps he wanted them to wake up - adds to the terror or excitement, for him that is.

Sends shivers down my spine to think he could have been looking through womens draws while they were sleeping and they never knew!!
https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/e...b6b-827d-9a3296764715?unredactedVersion=False
-also states he would scope peoples homes, waiting till they went out so he could break in while they were out!
And I have to say - with all this going on, surely his family noticed something odd about him or his behavior????

 

[Likeamystery]

Sends shivers down my spine to think he could have been looking through womens draws while they were sleeping and they never knew!!
https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/e...b6b-827d-9a3296764715?unredactedVersion=False
-also states he would scope peoples homes, waiting till they went out so he could break in while they were out!
And I have to say - with all this going on, surely his family noticed something odd about him or his behavior????

From memory, back in 1988/89 glass sliding doors were fairly newish, and most had a key for locking. If they weren't locked it was easy enough to jiggle the latch and open the door. Even security screens on windows were just becoming available and were expensive too. It must have been easy enough for him to get into places, possibly prowling around for hours trying to open doors or windows.
No wonder the occurrences were on Thursday and Saturday nights, any other time he'd be exhausted due to lack of sleep, because he had to get up for work.

His mother probably wondered why he was always tired!

 

[Krusty Crab]

From memory, back in 1988/89 glass sliding doors were fairly newish, and most had a key for locking. If they weren't locked it was easy enough to jiggle the latch and open the door. Even security screens on windows were just becoming available and were expensive too. It must have been easy enough for him to get into places, possibly prowling around for hours trying to open doors or windows.
No wonder the occurrences were on Thursday and Saturday nights, any other time he'd be exhausted due to lack of sleep, because he had to get up for work.

His mother probably wondered why he was always tired!

Thursday and saturday nights around this time was when young people were out. shopping on thursday nights for late trade, and partying on saturdays.

 

[Krusty Crab]

Perhaps he just thought things through in detail, got ideas from books or watched videos. Apparently some of these predators fantasize about what they'd like to do.

Within the houses he'd need to have known where the bedrooms were, thinking about it being dark inside the homes. quite possibly he spent time driving back and forth and figured where the female bedrooms were by the colour of the curtains or female ornaments etc.

As there were several people in the home he was very game or simply arrogant - perhaps he was desperate or liked the excitement. He's tall and should have been capable of getting a girl-friend but if he was socially awkward or a nerd he was probably quite frustrated.

Given the age of the female victim in the huntingdale attack, the birth date of BRE, and the location, i think its more likely he knew the girl, and had possibly been in the house before. they were around the same age, and both in roughly the same area, so possibly would of gone to the same school. he could of been in the house previous during a party, or visiting with friends. seems he wasn't that closely connected to the victim though, as she didn't recognize him. could the knotted stocking have been a face covering rather than for tying her up?

 

[Eaglette01]

^ Krusty read the Court documents - it is said "BRE knew the victims brother" and had been in the house at least once before - it will be claimed by the State BRE definitely knew the layout of her home.

I suggest everybody read the transcripts available. Loads of information available.

 

[zedx]

From memory, back in 1988/89 glass sliding doors were fairly newish, and most had a key for locking. If they weren't locked it was easy enough to jiggle the latch and open the door. Even security screens on windows were just becoming available and were expensive too. It must have been easy enough for him to get into places, possibly prowling around for hours trying to open doors or windows.
No wonder the occurrences were on Thursday and Saturday nights, any other time he'd be exhausted due to lack of sleep, because he had to get up for work.

His mother probably wondered why he was always tired!

Your absolutely right about the sliding doors and windows, my Dad was a builder and showed me how to do this when we got locked out once. Over my teenage years I have helped many a friend get in through a window or sliding door when their parents weren't home!!

 

[Likeamystery]

With regard to the next court hearing, has anyone got any ideas what will be presented? Beforehand there was mention of an additional item of clothing that needed DNA analysis which could possibly take months. They didn't say how the clothing might be related to the case though. Is anyone aware what the clothing was?

So far, the evidence proposed by the prosecution has been propensity or supporting evidence, of alleged incidents prior to the crimes he's been charged with. So, I guess if someone has come forward with an incident/crime from recent years that might fall under the category of propensity.

They haven't mentioned any ex-girlfriends or what they had to say - he's probably had a few girlfriends.