Current Claremont Murders - The Bunker

[zedx]

Why couldn't the police call his employer? Confidentiality doesn't apply when he commits an offence during the course of his daily employment. Hospital management would definitely have been all over that assault. He was protected by higher ups at Telstra...imo

IMHO - I dont know the answer to this, but its been making me think. Im pretty sure in my last job, if i did something like this it would immediately have been reported to my employer because-
* as i had not finished the job, the contractor (HH) would have to call my company to get some one to finish it.
* I had broken my position of trust and the contractor would say they didnt want me back.
and even though he pleaded guilty and it may have been a closed court hearing -
* The contractor would have to have given the victim permission to make a statement, as this happen during her work time on the work premises.
* Telsta would have to have been mentioned on the court hearing as his employer, and they would have needed permission to mention this.
I know things have changed greatly since this attack, but i just cant see him being taken away by the Police all hush hush, this would of been the gossip at the hospital for the next six months.

 

[Power Raid]

Surely the Police are required to call the Feds or National Security Agencies, in cases where the security risk to an employer is also potentially a national security risk under agreements they have between them?

unfortunately no regarding the case at hand

the police need to take the issue to the courts and seek an order to have the accused locked up in the case of public safety (until his hearing). This will only be granted under extreme circumstances and this was not one. The police can't go running around make accusations to third parties. In practice though, civilians will receive a warning under the guise of "part of the investigation" but strongly denied if raised later.

In short, police do not have this power and nor is it there job.



in regards to inter-departmental sharing of information in the case of National Security, yes they would subject to major controls regarding sharing of information. This is a recent power and would not have existed in the 90s as it exists now. This is a control in place to protect citizens from the dangers of large governments and the abuse of power.

 

[Power Raid]

Are you saying that in WA or Australia wide, it is currently possible to be sent or volunteer to go on a sex offenders treatment program and not be on any sex offender registers?

I am saying he was not charged with a sex offence rather just common assault. We all know his intent as did the judge and thus the instruction to go to a sex offenders treatment or another punishment would have been on offer........perhaps jail time.

There is no way he would have ended up on a sex offenders register today for what he did. Add to that the sex offenders register didn't exist then and even if he was successful in raping her, I'm still not sure what sexual offences end up on the list today.

 

[sprockets]

unfortunately no regarding the case at hand

the police need to take the issue to the courts and seek an order to have the accused locked up in the case of public safety (until his hearing). This will only be granted under extreme circumstances and this was not one. The police can't go running around make accusations to third parties. In practice though, civilians will receive a warning under the guise of "part of the investigation" but strongly denied if raised later.

In short, police do not have this power and nor is it there job.



in regards to inter-departmental sharing of information in the case of National Security, yes they would subject to major controls regarding sharing of information. This is a recent power and would not have existed in the 90s as it exists now. This is a control in place to protect citizens from the dangers of large governments and the abuse of power.

However, they can ask questions of the employer like 'Was BRE rostered on at this time' (just because BRE says he was doesn't mean he was). I suppose it comes down to what they believe happened whether to involve the employer or not. As I've stated elsewhere, we had an employee steal a computer from VicPol headquarters while he was working there on other stuff and not only was the company told of the incident by VicPol, the company told every employee (not to do this kind of thing and that X had been sacked).

 

[Power Raid]

Did they catch the guy who attacked the girl from Club Bay View referred to in the article?

well spotted

about the right age at the time to

 

[Chameleon75]

However, they can ask questions of the employer like 'Was BRE rostered on at this time' (just because BRE says he was doesn't mean he was). I suppose it comes down to what they believe happened whether to involve the employer or not. As I've stated elsewhere, we had an employee steal a computer from VicPol headquarters while he was working there on other stuff and not only was the company told of the incident by VicPol, the company told every employee (not to do this kind of thing and that X had been sacked).

They may also be interested in employment records to see if there’s been any complaints made about his conduct before as part of sentencing submission.

 

[sprockets]

They may also be interested in employment records to see if there’s been any complaints made about his conduct before as part of sentencing submission.

And considering the offence and that there'd been a number of incidents involving a Telstra driver doing creepy things involving women over the past couple of years a competent police force might look further into it... I mean, it should have been obvious the HH attack wasn't just a man wanting to punch on with a woman.

 

[Power Raid]

They may also be interested in employment records to see if there’s been any complaints made about his conduct before as part of sentencing submission.

If they had done anything, you'd expect them to link his finger prints to Huntingdale. That would then have resulted in DNA testing for the Kimono.

Sadly

1) The crimes were petty
2) the police are an incompetent government organisation


We got our man.....high five............who wants some maccas?


Edit HH to Huntingdale

 

[sprockets]

If they had done anything, you'd expect them to link his finger prints to HH. That would then have resulted in DNA testing for the Kimono.

Sadly

1) The crimes were petty
2) the police are an incompetent government organisation


We got our man.....high five............who wants some donuts?

Fixed

 

[Kurve]

Did they catch the guy who attacked the girl from Club Bay View referred to in the article?

It isn't relevant to the trial thus far. The police might not have even been able to locate the victim for this crime over twenty years later, she may have even passed away.

No Telstra van? Beyond the statute of limitations? Not relevant even if the likelihood may be that it was him.

 

[Feerits Elf]

2. Fibres - because they're shown to come from a Telstra car and clothing but not necessarily from BRE...

What fibres could be shown to have come from an accused?

 

[Benny The Smith]

Does anyone know if the Mystery Man was ever identified? The cc camera we’ve all seen looks to me like she knew the MM.

 

[Kurve]

Does anyone know if the Mystery Man was ever identified? The cc camera we’ve all seen looks to me like she knew the MM.

No. And it appears he may remain a mystery.

 

[Benny The Smith]

Odds on its you know who.

 

[BlueE]

If they had done anything, you'd expect them to link his finger prints to Huntingdale. That would then have resulted in DNA testing for the Kimono.

Sadly

1) The crimes were petty
2) the police are an incompetent government organisation

We got our man.....high five............who wants some maccas?

Edit HH to Huntingdale

If they had got Edwards name in the list of all Telstra employees that had company cars from 25th -28th Jan 1996 they formally asked for, police would have found the Hollywood Hospital assault very quickly when checking criminal convictions.

With a name, matching description and his possible link to the DNA for the KK rape they were also investigating they would have been able to get permission to take DNA.

The KK rape could have been solved in 1998 and it was only a short step from there to look at CSK and investigate Huntingdale incidents.

All seems a bit convenient his name wasn't on that list?

 

[Power Raid]

If they had got Edwards name in the list of all Telstra employees that had company cars from 25th -28th Jan 1996 they formally asked for, police would have found the Hollywood Hospital assault very quickly when checking criminal convictions.

With a name, matching description and his possible link to the DNA for the KK rape they were also investigating they would have been able to get permission to take DNA.

The KK rape could have been solved in 1998 and it was only a short step from there to look at CSK and investigate Huntingdale incidents.

All seems a bit convenient his name wasn't on that list?

Being ex military at this time, I appreciate how cars were logged in govt departments

PAPER

And no one really monitored the log books until something went wrong.



Even cop cars in the 90s had ignition keys under the front seat. That’s how lax things were.

Let’s not blame telecom, the police had to do their job properly and shouldn’t have to rely on others.

Further a log book properly completed would have helped but finger prints and DNA on record would still have been needed.........which they had.

 

[Power Raid]

If they had got Edwards name in the list of all Telstra employees that had company cars from 25th -28th Jan 1996 they formally asked for, police would have found the Hollywood Hospital assault very quickly when checking criminal convictions.

With a name, matching description and his possible link to the DNA for the KK rape they were also investigating they would have been able to get permission to take DNA.

The KK rape could have been solved in 1998 and it was only a short step from there to look at CSK and investigate Huntingdale incidents.

All seems a bit convenient his name wasn't on that list?

Oh and I bet it wasn’t a conspiracy by telecom board or even telecom department or dad.

Rather boys being boys and looking after a mate.

 

[Krusty Crab]

IMHO - I dont know the answer to this, but its been making me think. Im pretty sure in my last job, if i did something like this it would immediately have been reported to my employer because-
* as i had not finished the job, the contractor (HH) would have to call my company to get some one to finish it.
* I had broken my position of trust and the contractor would say they didnt want me back.
and even though he pleaded guilty and it may have been a closed court hearing -
* The contractor would have to have given the victim permission to make a statement, as this happen during her work time on the work premises.
* Telsta would have to have been mentioned on the court hearing as his employer, and they would have needed permission to mention this.
I know things have changed greatly since this attack, but i just cant see him being taken away by the Police all hush hush, this would of been the gossip at the hospital for the next six months.

lets say HH contacted telstra regards the attack. my view on what went down:

HH: OK brad, whos your boss at telstra and whats his contact number?
BRE: John Smith 555-5555

HH calls john smith:
HH: hi John Smith? we have one of your employees here, a BRE, who we no longer want working on our site. There has been an incident resulting in BRE being arrested by WAPOL, and one of our staff being traumatized. WAPOL will be investigating, however i sincerely hope you do your own internal investigation blah blah blah.
JS: We will do our utmost to look into this, apologies yada yada yada. I will schedule a new employee to finish the job tomorrow for you.

Next day:
JS: hey brad can we have a quick chat? so what happened at HH? they rang me and they were pissed. ive got Tony finishing that shift now. so whats your version of events?
BRE: sorry boss, i had a brain snap. im under pressure due to (insert sob story)
JS: OK brad, look, lets keep you away from HH, i dont want the client getting any further upset. we'll keep this between ourselves for now, although there could be serious repercussions for repeat occurrences. Your a good worker and you seem to be doing well here, so im not going to make your life harder than it needs to be. be aware though ill be watching you.

end result - no formal documentation. immediate boss knows. HH thinks its been sorted.

 

[Likeamystery]

lets say HH contacted telstra regards the attack. my view on what went down:

HH: OK brad, whos your boss at telstra and whats his contact number?
BRE: John Smith 555-5555

HH calls john smith:
HH: hi John Smith? we have one of your employees here, a BRE, who we no longer want working on our site. There has been an incident resulting in BRE being arrested by WAPOL, and one of our staff being traumatized. WAPOL will be investigating, however i sincerely hope you do your own internal investigation blah blah blah.
JS: We will do our utmost to look into this, apologies yada yada yada. I will schedule a new employee to finish the job tomorrow for you.

Next day:
JS: hey brad can we have a quick chat? so what happened at HH? they rang me and they were pissed. ive got Tony finishing that shift now. so whats your version of events?
BRE: sorry boss, i had a brain snap. im under pressure due to (insert sob story)
JS: OK brad, look, lets keep you away from HH, i dont want the client getting any further upset. we'll keep this between ourselves for now, although there could be serious repercussions for repeat occurrences. Your a good worker and you seem to be doing well here, so im not going to make your life harder than it needs to be. be aware though ill be watching you.

end result - no formal documentation. immediate boss knows. HH thinks its been sorted.

I'm sure that's mostly what happened, except for the part where he was asked to provide and explanation which must have been good. It may have gone something like this...
The woman at HH completely overreacted, and made a mountain out of a mole hill, with what started as an innocent gesture. She ranted and raved that much, that she convinced everyone I'd manhandled her. I don't know what the big deal was, I said I was sorry. You'll need to send somewhere else out there, I can't handle the whinger.

 

[Kurve]

BRE: sorry boss, i had a brain snap. im under pressure due to (insert sob story)

BRE: I've learned my lesson boss I now realise it's "highly advantageous to have a careful plan of attack."

 

[BFew]

Black jeans....

Or a very dark navy blue

 

[zedx]

Black jeans....

'DENIM SHIRT' fits description of man in car by one of the girls

 

[Badge666]

BRE: I've learned my lesson boss I now realise it's "highly advantageous to have a careful plan of attack."

If it was BREs direct supervisor who did fudge the due processes arising from the HH assault which we now know was so serious the victim " feared for her life " then this "careful plan of attack" comment is bone chilling .
I say this because it is the same supervisor who who have given out the promotion application to him and received it back to sign and pass on further up the chain to be processed.
IMO it is a little " in joke" on the paperwork because both BRE and the supervisor know he should have been instantly dismissed after the HH incident.
"must have been a naughty boy when you were younger .."
Everyone loves a clown"
Thanks Ladies.."
"Highly advantageous to have a careful plan of attack"
And also highly advantageous to have someone higher up in Telstra running protection for your sick behaviour.

I also find the fax sent back to WAPOL by Telstra after their enquiries regarding drivers of certain vehicles very very suspect. It is almost halfhearted.
Whoever received the initial fax from WAPOL should have immediately notified the State Manager of Telstra who should have the notified the National Manager and Chief Executive Officer. It was the most important issue on any agenda once they were notified of the possibility one of there staff could be involved.
"Sorry for the delay in getting back to you".......Oh no worries its just a triple murder investigation of three beautiful young ladies , and more could disappear any tick of the clock...no no take your time ..no biggie.
"please be aware that this list is very general and other employees may sometimes have access to these vehicles .....ok then send us a list of all other employees who might fall into that category -it is the biggest murder investigation in the States history FFS.

 

[BFew]

Whoever received the initial fax from WAPOL should have immediately notified the State Manager of Telstra who should have the notified the National Manager and Chief Executive Officer.

You'd hope that the CEO, possibly the whole Telstra Board, and the Telstra legal bosses would remember, both the requests (1996 and 1998).
And have gamed scenarios, for the potential days of reckoning, if the CSK did turn out to be one of their workers or using one of their vehicles.

Here's the very highly regarded ex head of Telstra legal amongst his other Telstra Exec roles.
He started off at Telstra legal I recall reading somewhere.
Now a very senior Exec at NBN Co who worked at Telstra (1997-2018) and was their CEO of Telstra's InfraCo entity (2018/19) before moving to possibly the most important NBN Exec role there is, as chief strategy and transformation officer.

I reckon he's the one to ask.
A brilliant mind like his, if he was ever informed, or knew, would IMO never ever forget something like a potential CSK amongst the staff.

Will Irving

Will Irving joined Telstra in 1997 and held a variety of legal roles prior to becoming Group General Counsel in 2005.

www.businessnews.com.au

Former Telstra wholesale boss Will Irving jumps ship to NBN Co

Helped establish Telstra InfraCo before his departure.

www.crn.com.au

 

[Badge666]

You'd hope that the CEO, possibly the whole Telstra Board, and the Telstra legal bosses would remember, both the requests (1996 and 1998).
And have gamed scenarios, for the potential days of reckoning, if the CSK did turn out to be one of their workers or using one of their vehicles.

Here's the very highly regarded ex head of Telstra legal amongst his other Telstra Exec roles.
He started off at Telstra legal I recall reading somewhere.
Now a very senior Exec at NBN Co who worked at Telstra (1997-2018) and was their CEO of Telstra's InfraCo entity (2018/19) before moving to possibly the most important NBN Exec role there is, as chief strategy and transformation officer.

I reckon he's the one to ask.
A brilliant mind like his, if he was ever informed, or knew, would IMO never ever forget something like a potential CSK amongst the staff.

Will Irving

Will Irving joined Telstra in 1997 and held a variety of legal roles prior to becoming Group General Counsel in 2005.

www.businessnews.com.au

Former Telstra wholesale boss Will Irving jumps ship to NBN Co

Helped establish Telstra InfraCo before his departure.

www.crn.com.au

Yes and I find it interesting that the only record Telstra has pertaining to the HH incident is that BRE was docked an hours annual leave the following day. To me that signals the supervisor who has determined to cover up the incident within the organisation is having a bit of a "saver " just incase the whole thing gets reported in the media ,blows up in his face and he gets sacked as well for not acting.
Immediately upon being notified of the incident at the Hospital BRE should have been stood down from duties , and upon admitting guilt sacked i.By docking him a paltry one hours leave he is leaving a record that some action, no matter how piddling was taken and BRE was "penalised".
The Australian Public need to know who BREs Telstra supervisor was in 1990.