Unsolved The Beaumont Children

[jason_recliner]

Mine are questions, not answers.

With more than 50 years to investigate the Beaumont case and the main suspects, it could indeed be likely that those routinely accused or suspected are indeed not guilty. However, I am not here to defend them or to deflect public interest away from them.

My 'drowning' hypothesis is not intended as a supposition on what really happened that day - it's put forth to illustrate that the real truth may be something totally different and far removed to most people's ideas on the case.

I could see one person drowning and the body not washing ashore. But three? And as mentioned, no gear left behind? Drowning can be ruled out as anything more than extremely unlikely IMO.

 

[EyeMedia]

I could see one person drowning and the body not washing ashore. But three? And as mentioned, no gear left behind? Drowning can be ruled out as anything more than extremely unlikely IMO.

It looks like every theory gets dismissed as ridiculous and full-of-holes by someone or other, and most people who take an interest in the Beaumont case seem more intent on disproving others' theories than solving the case itself.

I'd say that this case is a cover-up job and the Mullighan Report probably uncovered a sordid can of worms that won't get opened in our lifetime.

 

[jason_recliner]

It looks like every theory gets dismissed as ridiculous and full-of-holes by someone or other, and most people who take an interest in the Beaumont case seem more intent on disproving others' theories than solving the case itself.

I'd say that this case is a cover-up job and the Mullighan Report probably uncovered a sordid can of worms that won't get opened in our lifetime.

There's a logical progression and simple analysis of evidence that supports (most probably) dismissing drowning as a possible outcome.

What's the logic and evidence behind a statement like "this case is a cover-up job and the Mullighan Report probably uncovered a sordid can of worms that won't get opened in our lifetime"? Who would want to cover it up that would also have the power to do so, while ensuring not one leak after many decades?
Why would every single person involved in the Mulligan investigation all agree to cover that up? In a town as small as Adelaide where many people know somebody impacted by sexual abuse, and therefore have very strong personal feelings about it? Do you think there was a NDA signed by all staff that they would never disclose any of the findings and not one researcher/analyst/PA/manager/etc has leaked anything since then? How, practically, do you envisage a cover-up of the Beaumont children and the Mulligan Enquiry being implemented and maintained over the long term?

 

[Kurve]

Current - Mullighan Inquiry - South Australia

The Children in State Care Commission of Inquiry (the Mullighan Inquiry) was established in November 2004 to investigate allegations of sexual abuse and death from criminal misconduct of children in State care. The Hon Ted Mullighan, QC, former justice of the Supreme Court, was appointed as...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[bomberclifford]

I think they were abducted by Aliens to live on another planet.
You can't prove that they weren't and this line if enquiry was never investigated.

You'll just dismiss it though as being full of holes and ridiculous.

 

[Bits]

I think they were abducted by Aliens to live on another planet.
You can't prove that they weren't and this line if enquiry was never investigated.

You'll just dismiss it tough as being full of holes and ridiculous.

They were smuggled to America and grew up at Area 51.

 

[EyeMedia]

They were smuggled to America and grew up at Area 51.

Correct. Cardinal George Pell took them to Mars, where that 'workforce of child slave labour' allegedly goes on. Pell was the right man for the job. Child abuse occurred in Catholic institutions for years and no cover-up was even needed - all anyone needed to do was shut up about it.

But seriously, folks...

 

[EyeMedia]

There's a logical progression and simple analysis of evidence that supports (most probably) dismissing drowning as a possible outcome.

What's the logic and evidence behind a statement like "this case is a cover-up job and the Mullighan Report probably uncovered a sordid can of worms that won't get opened in our lifetime"? Who would want to cover it up that would also have the power to do so, while ensuring not one leak after many decades?
Why would every single person involved in the Mulligan investigation all agree to cover that up? In a town as small as Adelaide where many people know somebody impacted by sexual abuse, and therefore have very strong personal feelings about it? Do you think there was a NDA signed by all staff that they would never disclose any of the findings and not one researcher/analyst/PA/manager/etc has leaked anything since then? How, practically, do you envisage a cover-up of the Beaumont children and the Mulligan Enquiry being implemented and maintained over the long term?

I'll let you know when I find out. Everyone involved knew that there were no WMDs in Iraq, yet it was still used as justification to invade. I worked for a day with Hans Blix and everything going on was 'unspoken'. Everyone seemed to know it was suss, and no-one said anything. It took years for it to be exposed.

 

[johnymac1]

Mine are questions, not answers.

With more than 50 years to investigate the Beaumont case and the main suspects, it could indeed be likely that those routinely accused or suspected are indeed not guilty. However, I am not here to defend them or to deflect public interest away from them.

My 'drowning' hypothesis is not intended as a supposition on what really happened that day - it's put forth to illustrate that the real truth may be something totally different and far removed to most people's ideas on the case.

over 50 years. yeah and many have looked at the case, Cops, ex-Cops, Journalists - heaps of Journos following different leads.
Even the odd Bikie has climbed aboard and tried to contribute, then there are the many Private citizen's that have worked the case.
you would think in the 50 years, some-one got close to solving it

 

[charlie20]

without the mullighan report leaking as it has this case, and indeed others, could not be solved, but its very much like a puzzle, and even some of the best detectives and crime writers and journos and so forth may still not see what they have to see in order to solve the puzzle, you recall detectives dismissing mark marshall's story some years back as fantasy, was it? or did they just label it fantasy because they werent capable to seeing what it meant?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

without the mullighan report leaking as it has this case, and indeed others, could not be solved, but its very much like a puzzle, and even some of the best detectives and crime writers and journos and so forth may still not see what they have to see in order to solve the puzzle, you recall detectives dismissing mark marshall's story some years back as fantasy, was it? or did they just label it fantasy because they werent capable to seeing what it meant?

They labelled it fantasy because it was an unreliable source being as it was a convicted criminal. He told them his grandfather was the perp and that barrel drums containing remains could be found X on a map buried in a tunnel near a dam. The drums were found and contained an acidic liquid coloured red. Originally it was said there was a weak trace of blood later retracted to say there were no remains. Why were there drums with acid buried away at all? 40 years ago people didn't worry about proper disposal of industrial waste. Perhaps the acids used were enough to dissolve human remains entirely? Police have returned to perp land several times since and it is said because there were credible crime stoppers tips but those tips and the focus were consistent with the Marshall letter.

I have a belief that dead cases such as Beaumont and Adelaide oval will only be solved IF all available leads are offered to the community. Only then will something within then trigger a further lead. The police though won't follow that approach. We don't know what the crime stoppers tip off was and how it fitted community understanding of Yatina and Hart's role and other accumulated evidence. It's frustrating

 

[newbie11]

I see the Scott Hill article from another perspective..
My thoughts on him personally with whatever it is that he supposedly does or doesn’t do are of no relevance for me to make an assumption on his credibility as a witness ( or his dad as a witness)*^
Just like absolutely anyone else I’d take it for what it is and I’d take it at face value..

Outside the court of public opinions
The identifying evidence Scott’s father (witness) puts forward is arguably a lot stronger and more reliable.

 

[megadeth86]

I don't think it was a group that took those kids. Why choose them to take when they came from a stable family home with the reasonable expectation that the police would be all over their disappearance, parents and a neighbourhood that would never give up looking for them when there were apparently hundreds of kids to choose from in government and church run institutions.



This was raised earlier in the thread somewhere. That they weren't seen eating anything from that big order they placed at Wenzels but were spotted sitting on a bench chatting to someone apparently after they'd been to Wenzels is strange imo. I think the report of them going in to Wenzels with a one pound note is a red herring, it wasn't them.

The shop owners/workers knew the BC personally, right?

 

[megadeth86]

Thanks, Quadzilla... I will probably be back with more questions soon enough.

Those Beaumont kids were at the beach without supervision by their parents or a responsible adult. Two of them couldn't swim. Who's to say they didn't simply drown?

Or maybe they really were killed. As the Mafia say, "If there's no body, there's no murder." (It becomes just a missing persons case, to hide the murder.)

Then there's people who come forward with heart-felt and unshakeable views on exactly 'Whodunnit'. A relative (daughter?) of Harry Phipps did just that, resulting in the two costly and fruitless excavations at Castalloy, only to find nothing.

Then the McIntyres' insisted that their father did it. The kids' remains can be found on their father's Stansbury site, they said.

Even if Harry Phipps or Max McIntyre really were responsible, neither of them was very smart by burying the kids on their own property. Wouldn't a killer dump the bodies far away, to conceal any involvement in the matter?

Was Nancy Beaumont buried or cremated? If she was buried, it would be a good idea to exhume the body and get a sample of her DNA so her kids' skeletons can be positively ID'd if they are ever found. Or just get a sample from Jim Beaumont.

Why weren't Jim or Nancy ever contacted by the media for a comment or a story over the years? Something isn't right there.

(It is said that the Beaumont parents were left alone by the media to avoid opening old wounds, but the parents were already living with those painful memories every day, anyway.)

Like the JFK death, I think the real truth regarding the Beaumont kids and their fate is known but has been covered-up. Is it true that a coronial inquest has never been held?

In the Peter Falconio case there was no body but a murder conviction still resulted.

 

[EyeMedia]

In the Peter Falconio case there was no body but a murder conviction still resulted.

Exactly what happened? I don't know the Falconio case. Someone confessed? "Guilty!" (No body, and not even a trial, is required to determine guilt or innocence if a confession is already/freely proffered.)

The Stansbury property that has been cited (by Andrew McIntyre) as the burial spot for the Beaumont children is an unusual theory. That property seems to have been owned by the McIntyre family for decades, and it still is. If the Beaumont kids were in that spot, it would have been early 1966 when they were dumped there.

Andrew McIntyre himself lived on that property - or spent time there regularly - yet he never conducted a dig in all that time?

Admittedly Andrew McIntyre can't access that property anymore because his half-brother now resides there and does not make Andrew welcome, but what about in the past? Andrew and his believers had years to access the sinkhole with ease, yet they never did. Strange.

 

[newbie11]

Take every witness at face value;



️ You’ve got a shop worker that says;

“ I know/ recognise Jane Beaumont and on that day she came into the bakery where I worked and bought lunch for 6 people. She bought 1 pie, 5 pasties , 6 finger buns and 2 bottles of fizzy drink.

She paid for the items with a 1 pound note, I recall this because I remember thinking at the time ‘ that it was a large sum of money for such a young child’.”
This witness gives us recognition Identification Evidence, ( The strongest and most reliable Identification Evidence that a witness can give).

this witness statement is later corroborated by another alleged witness who says; Jane Beaumont told me that she wasn’t hungry because she had already eaten that the had already bought them lunch.

️ Then You’ve got another witness who says I know / recognise Jane, Arnna and Grant Beaumont as they are previously known to me from before the relevant occasion.

And on that day I was taking a short cut to beat the Australia Day traffic and I saw who I recognised as being Jane, Arnna and Grant Beaumont standing on the corner of Augusta and Durham Streets in Glenelg at 1.30pm.
They were with three other people – a thin-faced blond stranger, a strapper he recognised from one of the local racing stables with shoulder- length hair, and a middle-aged woman wearing a pale blue patterned dress.

 

[newbie11]

 

[DropBearess]

Take every witness at face value;



️ You’ve got a shop worker that says;

“ I know/ recognise Jane Beaumont and on that day she came into the bakery where I worked and bought lunch for 6 people. She bought 1 pie, 5 pasties , 6 finger buns and 2 bottles of fizzy drink.

She paid for the items with a 1 pound note, I recall this because I remember thinking at the time ‘ that it was a large sum of money for such a young child’.”
This witness gives us recognition Identification Evidence, ( The strongest and most reliable Identification Evidence that a witness can give).

this witness statement is later corroborated by another alleged witness who says; Jane Beaumont told me that she wasn’t hungry because she had already eaten that the had already bought them lunch.

️ Then You’ve got another witness who says I know / recognise Jane, Arnna and Grant Beaumont as they are previously known to me from before the relevant occasion.

And on that day I was taking a short cut to beat the Australia Day traffic and I saw who I recognised as being Jane, Arnna and Grant Beaumont standing on the corner of Augusta and Durham Streets in Glenelg at 1.30pm.
They were with three other people – a thin-faced blond stranger, a strapper he recognised from one of the local racing stables with shoulder- length hair, and a middle-aged woman wearing a pale blue patterned dress.

Did this witness in the bakery ever explain how the children carried all these things and where they put the change? How many hands did they have between them? Bear in mind they were already carrying at least 12 other items including clothing and three wet towels. Add all these pies, pasties and buns which would have been in at least five separate paper bags in those days. Then two heavy GLASS bottles of soft drink as well. I don't think so. Jane had one airways bag. Singlet bags didn't exist. Grant was four. How on earth did they grapple with all that?

I firmly believe the bakery evidence is one huge red herring which was only 'revealed' a year after the crime. As l see it, this 'lead' ruined the investigation and has resulted in many silly rabbit holes ever since.

 

[GreyCrow]

View attachment 1336974

What happened in regards to the strapper?

 

[newbie11]

What happened in regards to the strapper?

From what I’ve been able to gather… absolutely nothing?
I don’t what people have done personally but by all accounts he hasn’t even been looked at?

 

[newbie11]

Did this witness in the bakery ever explain how the children carried all these things and where they put the change? How many hands did they have between them? Bear in mind they were already carrying at least 12 other items including clothing and three wet towels. Add all these pies, pasties and buns which would have been in at least five separate paper bags in those days. Then two heavy GLASS bottles of soft drink as well. I don't think so. Jane had one airways bag. Singlet bags didn't exist. Grant was four. How on earth did they grapple with all that?

I firmly believe the bakery evidence is one huge red herring which was only 'revealed' a year after the crime. As l see it, this 'lead' ruined the investigation and has resulted in many silly rabbit holes ever since.

I wasn’t born until waaay after these kids went missing; what exactly is an airways bag?
When I hear the term airways bag I immediately think of 1 of like those big bags?

You do make a good point thou, but who knows how long the cops actually had that info for before they decided to release it to the public.,
The biggest thing that I don’t understand about it is - what’s everyone big fascination with the pound note itself? It can’t even be considered as circumstantial evidence.
It was 1 single pound note (that we don’t even have I might add )
& it was the freakin currency at the time.
It’s just as strong circumstantial evidence connecting to the entire population of Australia having been involved.
May as well just say “ well the suspect is believed to of been an air breather “ - so that’s another piece of circumstantial evidence aswell.

 

[GreyCrow]

From what I’ve been able to gather… absolutely nothing?
I don’t what people have done personally but by all accounts he hasn’t even been looked at?

Does that suggest the police didnt believe the witness or they didnt throw the resources at it?

 

[GreyCrow]

I wasn’t born until waaay after these kids went missing; what exactly is an airways bag?
When I hear the term airways bag I immediately think of 1 of like those big bags?

There wre various sizes but they were basic shoulder bags ie over 1 shoulder and hip height

 

[GreyCrow]

 

[newbie11]

Does that suggest the police didnt believe the witness or they didnt throw the resources at it?

My guess would only be as good as yours but I do think that they probably just had so many different leads and everything else they had to follow up on that it probably just got lost and forgotten about