Unsolved The Beaumont Children

[johnymac1]

So if you looked like this in 1966, you would want to hide for a few months or years.
Where would you go? country SA or Outback SA, or possibly interstate?

 

[GreyCrow]

So if you looked like this in 1966, you would want to hide for a few months or years.
Where would you go? country SA or Outback SA, or possibly interstate?
View attachment 859485

Probably Yatina outback SA

 

[RedmanWasHere]

Monday 31st June in 1966.

The 31st of June is an impossibility.

 

[BlueE]

The 31st of June is an impossibility.

Yep typo. Read the calendar. Aust Day holiday in 1966 was 31st Jan.

 

[BlueE]

So if you looked like this in 1966, you would want to hide for a few months or years.
Where would you go? country SA or Outback SA, or possibly interstate?
View attachment 859485

Interesting transcript from a radio interview of the man that sketched the identikit. He had been drinking, had 2 woman that insisted they saw a man who had abducted the children telling him different thing about the man, but they couldn't describe what they meant when asked for associations.

One emphasising a very thin face even though this wasn't mentioned on the reports of the three woman or the original police description. Sounds like a chaotic atmosphere he was in when drawing the sketch, with detectives intervening, other people getting involved and TV cameras appearing when he was trying to draw the sketch and quite possible mixing up two descriptions of two different men.

The Beaumont Children: The "Identikit"

 

[Kurve]

"Official resume of the Beaumont Case, courtesy of the South Australia Police", is as follows: "Male, mid to late 30's, about 6' tall, thin to athletic build, with light brown short hair swept back and parted on the left side, clean-shaven, suntanned complexion, with a thin face. Australian accent. Wearing blue bathers with a single white stripe down the outside of each leg." (see bibliography 76 in archive)

One emphasising a very thin face even though this wasn't mentioned on the reports of the three woman or the original police description. Sounds like a chaotic atmosphere he was in when drawing the sketch, with detectives intervening, other people getting involved and TV cameras appearing when he was trying to draw the sketch and quite possible mixing up two descriptions of two different men.

From your own link it's clear that a description of the man with the kids given to investigators had him with a thin face and that same description again was given to the sketch artist.

 

[Norwood1878]

Do you have a link Norwood1878 ? All the calendars I'm seeing including South Australia and reports have the 26th January as the national public holiday.

As posted earlier Australia Day holiday was observed 31st of Jan in SA in 1966. "Steve also said that on many occasions during the 1960s, either while walking home from school or heading up to the shops at Glenelg, he would see Hank driving around Glenelg in his Pontiac. “He wasn’t dictated to by [office] hours,” Steve said, which might explain why Hank could have been home on Australia Day 1966, a normal working day. “He seemed to spend a lot of time cruising around town.”

Here's a look at dates through that decade.

 

[Kurve]

"Steve also said that on many occasions during the 1960s, either while walking home from school or heading up to the shops at Glenelg, he would see Hank driving around Glenelg in his Pontiac. “He wasn’t dictated to by [office] hours,” Steve said, which might explain why Hank could have been home on Australia Day 1966, a normal working day. “He seemed to spend a lot of time cruising around town.”

Fascinating, so all the focus on it being Australia Day and all the traffic around the national holiday that day are assumptions made by people who aren't aware. And many of the 'suspects' put forward should probably have been at work?

 

[Norwood1878]

Fascinating, so all the focus on it being Australia Day and all the traffic around the national holiday that day are assumptions made by people who aren't aware. And many of the 'suspects' put forward should probably have been at work?

Yes, I guess it depends on your age. Jan 26 became the national public holiday in 1995, it was still considered Aus day prior just that the holiday was observed on the following Mon. (if it falls on a Sat/Sunday you get the Monday off like this year). Glenelg beach would still have been relatively busy. If there were any real clear suspects at the time of disappearance even in the first 12 months for eg then employment records ie time sheets could have been checked.

 

[johnymac1]

The BC abductor

So what make this guy tick

Lets say this guy was 26 - 36 at the time of the abductions. So this guy has grown up through the war years. ( 1939 – 1945 ). As we know, Killers typically come from dysfunctional homes. Where one or both parents were abusive to some degree. If, his father was serving overseas, means he may have been exposed to a stressed Mother. However when the father has returned from service the Dad may have also introduced some issues into the home. Alcoholic or abusive parents may have shaped our guy.

Alternately our guy may have also seen service in one of the other conflicts. Vietnam or Korean conflicts may have also shaped this guy into a monster we suspect today. Remember he was described as tall thin and athletic. Did he see active service in the armed forces?. Did he develop some grooming skills in a a different setting.?

Is our guy a local or from out of town? Because Glenelg is considered one of Adelaide’s top tourist draw-cards. Could he have come from out of town or even interstate? Personally I think a local would have targeted a more quieter beach. Less chance of being identified. Or was he confident that no-one would recognise him?

So what did our guy do for a job? He could have already been working with children. He seems confident and controlling in their presence. He allegedly had a One pound note, so he must have a well paid job. I was toying with an idea he worked as a teacher.

 

[Wallaby]

1 pound in 1966 had the buying power of about $25-30 today. Not a lot - particularly when factoring into probably the most important project you have attempted in your life (talking from the abductor's point of view). Any casual worker would have easy access to a pound back in 1966. The weekly unemployment benefit for an adult was about 4 pounds.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to try and draw any profile from a single act, in which there were no reliable witnesses, no follow-up (ie - no bodies found), no idea about how the act actually occurred (where were the children taken? How were they taken? What happened to them), and no other confirmed cases to compare with (was the Adelaide Oval abduction related? Maybe, maybe not). And plenty of murderers have come from safe, comfortable backgrounds (eg Martin Bryant, Derek Percy).

There has been so much talk, revision, remembering, interviews 20-40 years later, books, and 'off the record talking' about this case, so many possible linkages (Adelaide Oval, The Family etc), but so few hard facts, that it is very difficult to separate what is actually known from speculation that has become 'accepted'.

However, nothing else has worked in 50+ years, so we may as well keep trying anything. This thread is at 2,600+ posts. And there's probably many, many more discussion blogs/threads whatever out there in internet-land.

 

[BlueE]

From your own link it's clear that a description of the man with the kids given to investigators had him with a thin face and that same description again was given to the sketch artist.

But not very thin face which the identikit seems to emphasis and not blonde hair. Unless the two women were giving a description of two different men?

Both woman 2 and 3 who last saw the children from 12 - 12.15 pm on the beach gave different statements, with woman 3 seeing the man in blue bathers with a white stripe help dress the children and then walk away by himself with his trousers and towel and no T shirt and woman 2 seeing a man walk off with the children in another direction.

There were headlines looking for the "middle aged brown haired man" and young blonde surfy type that I posted early in the thread.

Mostly the description gets mixed up as an example the Canberra Times 31st Jan report that Crow posted a few pages back the

"light brown, short hair, swept back and parted on the left side, clean-shaven, suntanned complexion, thin to athletic build, with a thin face."

becomes "fairish to light brown hair in need of cutting, suntanned of medium build with a thin face...".

 

[Kurve]

But not very thin face

Splitting hairs.

 

[BlueE]

Yes, I guess it depends on your age. Jan 26 became the national public holiday in 1995, it was still considered Aus day prior just that the holiday was observed on the following Mon. (if it falls on a Sat/Sunday you get the Monday off like this year). Glenelg beach would still have been relatively busy. If there were any real clear suspects at the time of disappearance even in the first 12 months for eg then employment records ie time sheets could have been checked.

Norwood, were you one of the posters on here that thought Wenzel's cake shop was in a location on Colley Tce in 1966?

 

[BlueE]

Splitting hairs.

Take my the whole quote and don't pick on a few words.

Every article that seemed to come out about the man police were looking for was a very thin face like the identikit showed. This pointed to men that didn't match the police written description typed up from the women witnesses.

If you read the transcript from the radio interview done by the artist who described drinking the chaos at the police station when being bombarded by two women witnesses, police telling him what they thought and TV crews turning up when he was trying to draw, as well as drinking before attempting the sketch, as well as other factors making the point why his sketch looked like it did, rather than like typed statements from the witnesses.

 

[Kurve]

Take my the whole quote and don't pick on a few words.

Every article that seemed to come out about the man police were looking for was a very thin face like the identikit showed. This pointed to men that didn't match the police written description typed up from the women witnesses.

If you read the transcript from the radio interview done by the artist who described drinking the chaos at the police station when being bombarded by two women witnesses, police telling him what they thought and TV crews turning up when he was trying to draw, as well as drinking before attempting the sketch, as well as other factors making the point why his sketch looked like it did, rather than like typed statements from the witnesses.

I don't need to address the whole post discussing minutiae when the point is sharp and can be made in a few words.

I've also read the radio interview, which only claims to be a true representation of the oratory but which also states the women said the man's face was gaunt. That means thin. On the whole, I would be satisified the guy's face was thin to remarkably thin. You're splitting hairs and in my view it does match the police reports.

 

[BlueE]

I don't need to address the whole post discussing minutiae when the point is sharp and can be made in a few words.

I've also read the radio interview, which only claims to be a true representation of the oratory but which also states the women said the man's face was gaunt. That means thin. On the whole, I would be satisified the guy's face was thin to remarkably thin. You're splitting hairs and in my view it does match the police reports.

One of the woman did. One of the woman saw a man walking away with the children and one saw a man that returned from Wenzels with the children walking away by himself in a different direction. Two different men.

 

[johnymac1]

1 pound in 1966 had the buying power of about $25-30 today. Not a lot - particularly when factoring into probably the most important project you have attempted in your life (talking from the abductor's point of view). Any casual worker would have easy access to a pound back in 1966. The weekly unemployment benefit for an adult was about 4 pounds.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to try and draw any profile from a single act, in which there were no reliable witnesses, no follow-up (ie - no bodies found), no idea about how the act actually occurred (where were the children taken? How were they taken? What happened to them), and no other confirmed cases to compare with (was the Adelaide Oval abduction related? Maybe, maybe not). And plenty of murderers have come from safe, comfortable backgrounds (eg Martin Bryant, Derek Percy).

There has been so much talk, revision, remembering, interviews 20-40 years later, books, and 'off the record talking' about this case, so many possible linkages (Adelaide Oval, The Family etc), but so few hard facts, that it is very difficult to separate what is actually known from speculation that has become 'accepted'.

However, nothing else has worked in 50+ years, so we may as well keep trying anything. This thread is at 2,600+ posts. And there's probably many, many more discussion blogs/threads whatever out there in internet-land.

We dont have many Predators to study here in Australia.
If we have a few dots to fill in, we sometimes have to look at other cases, to get some kind of idea what went on.
This is our Number 1. Cold case in SA. False leads have bogged this case down for years.
I really think they need to bring the Identikit photo into the 2!st century, for starters.

 

[Kurve]

We dont have many Predators to study here in Australia.
If we have a few dots to fill in, we sometimes have to look at other cases, to get some kind of idea what went on.
This is our Number 1. Cold case in SA. False leads have bogged this case down for years.
I really think they need to bring the Identikit photo into the 2!st century, for starters.

That's it. These types of very bold and cunning predators are thankfully rare, even rarer that more than one child is taken at the same time which brings me to the Adelaide Oval abductions and the similarities not just in the identikits which show a thin faced man but in the way they disappeared from public where the kids were seen by so many. The person/a who took all these kids is a supremely confident operator.

 

[Kurve]

Probably Yatina outback SA

There's a good summary in here on Stanley Hart and Mark Marshall. Mention of the Yatina property that was dug up, a bunker and tunnels which is suspiciously very similar to stories on the Beaumont children but applied to another property in Adelaide.

It's frustrating seeing meddlers steal bits and pieces of verified facts from other crime investigations and massage them into their own stories fancifully taking ownership.

No Cookies | The Advertiser

www.adelaidenow.com.au

 

[GreyCrow]

It's frustrating seeing meddlers steal bits and pieces of verified facts from other crime investigations and massage them into their own stories fancifully taking ownership.

Have to agree. So much chaff that you lose sight of the truth . As an example we have

Andrew McIntyre says he was abused by his father and others

Haydn Phipps says he was abused by his father

Mark Marshall says he was abused by his father and family members

AM says his father (and others ) was involved with the BC

HP says his father was involved in the BC

MM says his father ( and grandfather ) were involved in the BC

AM accuses father of being involved in most of the notorious Adelaide murders

MM accuses his father and grandfather of being involved in most of the notorious Adelaide murders

I wish these charlatans would FRO

And up yours for the dislike Mycroft

 

[Macka_321]

There may be some truth to what they are saying but some of there other claims have no credibility at all they expect the police to do what? If police went around and dug every place someone said someone is buried they would have no time for anything else. What if they go and dig and find nothing then what?

 

[Norwood1878]

Norwood, were you one of the posters on here that thought Wenzel's cake shop was in a location on Colley Tce in 1966?

Yes, yes i was. I may have posted some satellite/map/aerial images of the original location somewhere in the thread too (i id a bunch of internet searching through state library and other archives). I may have been mistaken for Moseley st though. I always thought it was at it's current location up until a few years ago.

EDIT, i still have them saved. Eg this pic circa 1959. Legend- 1 last seen prior to Wenzels 2 Phipps house 3 Wenzels

 

[Norwood1878]

 

[BlueE]

Have to agree. So much chaff that you lose sight of the truth . As an example we have

Andrew McIntyre says he was abused by his father and others

And up yours for the dislike Mycroft

A lot of chaff here.

If you are talking sexual abuse, Andrew has alleged that about his father, but he is a victim of historical sexual abuse by Tony Monro. So how about telling the truth. You are wrong and making defamatory comments.

Andrew McIntyre has proved his case in Court, as have at least two other boys, unknown to each other at the time, against Tony Monro who was offending during the time that the Beaumont children disappeared.

Here is some more truth, that the police description of the man seen playing with the Beaumont children exactly matches Max McIntyre's physical description and clothing he was wearing when he went to the beach that morning.