They were facts, proven true and the only reason SA police eventually charged Munro was that Andrew took his allegations to a Royal Commission who recommended charges.
I've no complaints against the Glenelg police and if you go back to their original typed reports you find the best informaton. What was put forward in the investigation and by the press was not up to them.
From the archived links. Also interesting in March 1966, ex-policeman Ray "Gunner" Kelly flew into Adelaide. A legendary figure in the NSW Police Force, he had only recently retired with the rank of Detective Inspector, and had been probably Australia's most famous policeman. He was employed on a private investigation into the disappearance of the Beaumont children by a Sydney newspaper. But Kelly left after only one day.
Not counting John Pike (no influence on his sentencing) there are three separate groups of people all independent and not known to each other who all alleged Tony Munro was involved and all have other perpetrators as well. SA women's branch of police have a police report supporting one of allegations. And the other's have independent statements supporting their allegations.
Shouldn't be that hard and time to question SA police in this case.
According to you! You also stated the Vietnam vet identified Munro as the person with the kids when he didn't. His description is also different to that of the old couple who were actually there and have never mentioned this Vietnam vet.
You're picking and choosing things to suit your argument instead of looking at ALL of the evidence. And you reckon I have a narrow focus! I don't know who committed the crime and I'm not discounting anyone because, as I posted, a case can be made for a number of people - how on earth is that a narrow focus. Take a look in the mirror.
As for this 'new witness' I'll believe it when I see it. What exactly does he corroborate?
that TM was at a house where they last seen
same man that Andrew also states seen that day
2 independant witness's 1 man seen So there's nowhere we can see this police report? Why would it be made public as that would give the name of witness who wishes to remain nameless due to his safety The witness, who had been conscripted for the Vietnam War effort, was flown to Puckapunyal, Victoria, a week after the children missing. "We had no television and no SA papers." he said. "I was away for two years.... And I didn't come back in very good shape."
Correct he / they did come back with problems and as asked my husband who was over there same time , they had no news reports / papers , they were more concerned about what was to happen over there
You also stated the Vietnam vet identified Munro as the person with the kids when he didn't. His description is also different to that of the old couple who were actually there and have never mentioned this Vietnam vet.
the Veteran was also there that day and has even gone so far as to ask TM to meet him and TM hasnnt and wont
Police have a whole heap of new evidence & evidence that corroborates Ruth & Andrew's claims of make & model of some cars involved that day but the two McIntyre kids have never met this new witness
Yep independant witness's
As part of a history festival or something, there's an event on at the Burnside Library for the Beaumont children.
The case of the "Missing Beaumont Children" has been forged into Australia's psyche and soul like no other crime. A crime so shocking that it has often been described as a defining moment in this country's history. After 50 years of intense police investigation the whereabouts of Jane (9), Arrna (7) and Grant Beaumont (4) is still a mystery; Australia's most famous unsolved crime. Author Michael Madigan will share his insights into this enduring mystery. Refreshments provided.