Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates

[zedx]

Anybody else still wondering if Telstra has no responsibility here, or do we need more?

This was after the HH attack which was when he was on the job as a Telstra employee.

Under the personal attributes section, Mr Edwards wrote: "highly advantageous to have a careful plan of attack."
I think this was said with a double meaning!! Which is horrifying.
Still not sure about Telstra. They certainly didn't seem to be trying to help. Just giving the specific information requested.

 

[Likeamystery]

They are not getting the Sleep Doctor up in court to testify about pencil sharpeners sleep apnea , snoring or haemorrhoids . Period.
BRE has mentioned to the sleep doctor about his marital problems and heavy drinking as relevant to his symptoms-not by way of general chit chat, which fits in with the prosecution theory and is important. Thats why they got him up there. Yes the sleeping tablet medication is only speculation so far but interestingly was suggested when first photos of the accused surfaced .
As Far as Perths Culture..yes some valid points-however you left out another-as far as getting a " good job "in those days the golden rule was " its not what you know -its who you know.'
With Edwards did that axiom apply to "keeping a good job " as well ???.
Im sure we will find out. Has anyone ever seen a photo of the father, ??. Was reported that the father was BREs direct supervisor early on but seems to have gone quiet about it since..why>?
As far as Telstras Culpability and responsibility- please...its not enough that this guy KEPT HIS JOB after attacking a woman in broad daylight whilst in company uniform causing her to "fight for her life".... leaving him free to continue cruising the streets in his company supplied vehicle and go on to commit a vicious rape and be accused of 3 murders....
.He then doesn't show up on two BCI requests made to Telstra despite being a convicted sex offender with form in the precise area the attacks are taking place...???????????........Hmmmmmmmmm
Telstra has certainly got some explaining to do.

Thanks Badge, for saying it how it is.

Telstra needs to explain what protocols they've, since put in place. Protocols to ensure professional staff, without prior convictions are employed.

Telstra, WAPOL and the Cold Squad Investigation Team are government departments and work for us - the taxpayer.

 

[zedx]

Thanks Badge, for saying it how it is.

Telstra needs to explain what protocols they've, since put in place. Protocols to ensure professional staff, without prior convictions are employed.

Telstra, WAPOL and the Cold Squad Investigation Team are government departments and work for us - the taxpayer.

defiantly! Considering these employees quite often have to go into people homes to repair lines etc.

 

[Feerits Elf]

Mr Vomero said staff were paid a disability allowance when people were under adverse conditions.

 

[Kurve]

Telstra needs to explain what protocols they've, since put in place. Protocols to ensure professional staff, without prior convictions are employed.

Telstra went through all their employees in the 90s (mid to late) checking for sex offences. I wonder what triggered that?

I know this because I know a Telstra Tech who had an old carnal knowledge conviction prior to being employed by Telstra that he'd kept quiet (which is a sex offence) and he was worried about losing his job.

 

[Kurve]

Parked:
Wed 04/12/19 – Week 2 – Day 8 – 10am:
It was a massive day in court, with eight witnesses taking the stand, including the woman who was attacked from behind by Bradley Robert Edwards in 1990, who spoke about her ordeal publicly for the first time.
Police were looking into Telstra vehicles – and who was driving them – as early as July 1996, a month after Bradley Robert Edwards allegedly snatched Jane Rimmer from Claremont and before the third victim was taken.

Edit: The lovely shellyg is blogging the blogger today

I'll just finish up on Vomero's testimony then take on WAToday. I didn't realise you were around for today's and didn't want to hassle you over it. Emily's blog is awkward to get in order.

 

[Likeamystery]

Snipped for brevity...
The court is now being shown a document showing personal attributes for the job Mr Edwards applied for in April 3, 1992.
Under the personal attributes section, Mr Edwards wrote: "highly advantageous to have a careful plan of attack."
When asked by Justice Hall what was the relevance of this, Ms Barbagallo said it was relevant because that was how he saw himself in 1992.

Mr Vomero said staff were paid a disability allowance when people were under adverse conditions.

Documents showing money being deducted from Mr Edwards pay for his work uniform from October 6 1989 was also shown.

Seems that the Telstra witness made quite an effort to gather information. Unlike what Telstra provided in the past.

Highly advantageous to have a careful plan of attack - sounds very arrogant - how strange!

Disability allowance - another term for danger money

New work uniform issued September/October 1989.

 

[Girlnextdoor]

Telstra went through all their employees in the 90s (mid to late) checking for sex offences. I wonder what triggered that?

I know this because I know a Telstra Tech who had an old carnal knowledge charge (which is a sex offence) and he was worried about losing his job.

Could I just ask, wasn't BRE's HH attack just actually classed as assault not sexual assault (even though he has to undergo sexual offenders course)? Also think it was a suspended sentence and as we have covered before, these SS don't show up even on some Police checks like Working with Children? I agree, looks a bit strange that someone could be promoted after completing such a course, but huge organisation, one hand doesn't necessarily know what other hand is doing, especially if one of those hands is a relative?

 

[Feerits Elf]

especially if one of those hands is a relative

What does that mean?

 

[Kurve]

Could I just ask, wasn't BRE's HH attack just actually classed as assault not sexual assault (even though he has to undergo sexual offenders course)? Also think it was a suspended sentence and as we have covered before, these SS don't show up even on some Police checks like Working with Children? I agree, looks a bit strange that someone could be promoted after completing such a course, but huge organisation, one hand doesn't necessarily know what other hand is doing, especially if one of those hands is a relative?

Yes, it was a common assault on paper but a conviction nevertheless and he was on the job as a Telstra employee when he attacked the social worker. He was arrested while on the job.

There is no way Telstra wasn't across that.

And anybody with the authority to scratch the surface of that assault should have seen straight away there was more to it.

 

[Belnakor]

Disability allowance - another term for danger money

huh?

Disability allowance means BRE was probably claiming stress leave etc due to his divorce.

 

[Feerits Elf]

Disability allowance means BRE was probably claiming stress leave

 

[Kurve]

What does that mean?

His family have probably been cleaning up after Bradley since he first started stuffing up.

Parents do that kind of thing trying to keep their kid out of jail and in a job. Of course that should only go so far lest it becomes enabling.

 

[Girlnextdoor]

What does that mean?

 

[Girlnextdoor]

His family have probably been cleaning up after Bradley since he first started stuffing up.

Parents do that kind of thing trying to keep their kid out of jail and in a job. Of course that should only go so far lest it becomes enabling.

Thanks Shelly, totally agree, especially the "enabling" comment.

 

[craigos]

Thanks Badge, for saying it how it is.

Telstra needs to explain what protocols they've, since put in place. Protocols to ensure professional staff, without prior convictions are employed.

Telstra, WAPOL and the Cold Squad Investigation Team are government departments and work for us - the taxpayer.

Question 1: Are you a rapist?
Question 2: Are you a serial killer?
Question 3: Did you lie about the above answers?

 

[kingswood71]

"The court also heard Mr Edwards took sick leave on January 28, 1996 - the day after Sarah Spiers disappeared."
Sunday.
Worked the Saturday.

 

[Eaglette01]

This one's a beauty - Telstra didnt know:

Ms Barbagallo has asked Mr Vomero if Telstra had any records of Mr Edwards' attack on a social worker at Hollywood Hospital on May 7, 1990.
Mr Vomero said no, Telstra did not hold any records about the attack.

 

[Kurve]

This one's a beauty - Telstra didnt know:

Ms Barbagallo has asked Mr Vomero if Telstra had any records of Mr Edwards' attack on a social worker at Hollywood Hospital on May 7, 1990.
Mr Vomero said no, Telstra did not hold any records about the attack.

They had to know. The records just aren't there for some reason or another .... lah lah lah the usual about how backwards their systems were lah lah lah

 

[Chameleon75]

They had to know. The records just aren't there for some reason or another .... lah lah lah the usual about how backwards their systems were lah lah lah

Or someone covered for him at the time so he could keep his job.

 

[Kurve]

Or someone covered for him at the time so he could keep his job.

That could only be done if it was someone within Telstra, therefore it can't be said Telstra didn't know about it.

We might hear about incident reports at HH soon.

 

[Feerits Elf]

His family have probably been cleaning up after Bradley since he first started stuffing up.

Parents do that kind of thing trying to keep their kid out of jail and in a job. Of course that should only go so far lest it becomes enabling.

What's that got to do with Telstra?

 

[Chameleon75]

That could only be done if it was someone within Telstra, therefore it can't be said Telstra didn't know about it.

We might hear about incident reports at HH soon.

Yeah that’s what I’m implying, only certain levels of management have the authority to hire and fire, so I’m guessing it’s someone between him and that person that’s made sure the info hasn’t gone any further.

 

[Kurve]

What's that got to do with Telstra?

His father was in a senior position at Telstra.

 

[BonzaRam]

Couldn't that just be answer to how do you solve problens/what's an important factor of problem solving on the job?

Yeah i think so, back then the phrase "so what is the plan of attack" was used by many people discussing the job in front of them.

Another way of saying it is " Failing to plan is planning to fail." Anyone doing business studies of any kind back then would have heard that expression... an employer would see that as a positive not a negative and I very much doubt their minds would be thinking of serial killers when reading it.