Unsolved The Beaumont Children

[Angry Red Bull]

I sought to see if there was a video of Brown at his murder trial for Mackay murders to check for a stoop. None that I could see though lots of photos.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Novel writers lol

Having read the Ray Kelly 'expose' I hope he put novelist on his resume.

Happy with a full comprehensive review of the facts.

Unfortunately there are too many myths and fantasies surrounding this case to be of any use.

The time to evaluate the worth of information is AFTER it has been gathered. A book like the Satin Man is rubbish imo. But he's not the only writer and each undertakes some research and only one minute clue might be enough. A name a place an association etc.

As example what we do know about AO is:

A man named Smythe was there that day with daughters who played with the abducted girls. He was an associate of Hart. One daughter grew up and married Mark Trevor Marshall convicted pedaphile grandson of Hart. Hart lived a block away from Kirste grandmother. Another man named Frank Bone sat with both families but refused to search and refused later to attend inquest though called 3 times and had a property deal with Bevan Spencer's mother I believe at a later date. Hart usually attended these games. Hart had access to an abandoned family home at prospect which also had an underground bunker in the back yard at the time (his father passed away shortly beforehand). That was the general direction travelled after abduction I understand. That bunker was filled in before the property was sold some time after 73. MM fingered Hart his grandad and said he was there when they were put in Hart's van (aged 3-4) and pointed to drums hidden in the walls of a tunnel at Myponga dam that were drained and found where MM said they were. That area was where Hart was associated with marijuana trade. And had a family home not far away with wells that have been searched by police. Hart was interviewed by police immediately after AO. Hart was requested to move away from Adelaide because his pedaphile activities were garnering too much attention for associates. Bograt has indicated that request came from police

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Whilst I was reading once more the media and witness accounts of AO one comment came up. A cross dresser or transexual was there near toilets but police dismissed their presence on the basis that no perp would willingly bring attention to themselves by being dressed that way. They treated it as being irrelevant

Of course in hindsight what we now know is that one or more transexuals were linked to the family murders. Bevan Spencer seemingly has a link to Frank Bone. And a transexual was prominent enough to be mentioned by police.

I know the family murders are much later and involve mostly teen boys. I'm getting bad vibes though that something akin to a forerunner of the family existed as early as 73

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The thing that totally baffles in this case - aside from absolutely everything - is the why.

Why on earth were they killed?

Everybody seems to agree their abduction is due to sexual abuse... but even that doesn't explain why they were murdered and disappeared.

Paedophiles don't just murder their victims.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

The thing that totally baffles in this case - aside from absolutely everything - is the why.

Why on earth were they killed?

Everybody seems to agree their abduction is due to sexual abuse... but even that doesn't explain why they were murdered and disappeared.

Paedophiles don't just murder their victims.

Yes absolutely.

So for a few hours sickening sexual abuse he ended their life. The guy is a sociopath I believe for that reason. Norms just aren't established inside his brain to rationalise that scenario. Indeed it's likely that only one of them was a target.

 

[jason_recliner]

The thing that totally baffles in this case - aside from absolutely everything - is the why.

Why on earth were they killed?

Everybody seems to agree their abduction is due to sexual abuse... but even that doesn't explain why they were murdered and disappeared.

Paedophiles don't just murder their victims.

Harder to convict if there is no witness/victim?

 

[DropBearess]

The thing that totally baffles in this case - aside from absolutely everything - is the why.

Why on earth were they killed?

Everybody seems to agree their abduction is due to sexual abuse... but even that doesn't explain why they were murdered and disappeared.

Paedophiles don't just murder their victims.

In both the AO and BC, l think they were killed because there were older kids involved who would tell. Pedophiles like kids under five because they can't articulate what has happened to them.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Harder to convict if there is no witness/victim?

In both the AO and BC, l think they were killed because there were older kids involved who would tell. Pedophiles like kids under five because they can't articulate what has happened to them.

This is of course possible, but I personally think a big leap. To go from pedophile to multiple murderer is a huge jump. Many pedophiles play on the fact that their victims, being so young, either cannot complain properly or won’t be taken seriously. And that’s even now, let some 60 years ago when the general awareness of these things, the recognition of victims and the promoting of actually believing victims was far less than it is now. I just find it hard to compute that a pedophile in the 60s would murder three children just to cover his tracks.

It makes me think something has gone horribly wrong (even more horrible than sexual abuse itself) which has led to a death, and that’s when the other two had to be killed. Horrific.

 

[jason_recliner]

This is of course possible, but I personally think a big leap. To go from pedophile to multiple murderer is a huge jump. Many pedophiles play on the fact that their victims, being so young, either cannot complain properly or won’t be taken seriously. And that’s even now, let some 60 years ago when the general awareness of these things, the recognition of victims and the promoting of actually believing victims was far less than it is now. I just find it hard to compute that a pedophile in the 60s would murder three children just to cover his tracks.

It makes me think something has gone horribly wrong (even more horrible than sexual abuse itself) which has led to a death, and that’s when the other two had to be killed. Horrific.

Yes, and it's not a 'typical' offence.

 

[EyeMedia]

Perhaps. You have to believe though.

I am parent to 2 girls and a boy now late teens. It breaks my heart that a family lost 3 children in one day. Every effort needs to be made

Fair enough, but solving it may not fix any wrong-doing or bring the guilty to justice... too old to stand trial, already dead, already in prison, insufficient evidence, memories faded, the "can't recall" defence, etc...

 

[megadeth86]

My point was that there would have certainly been perpetrators in 1966 that were unknown to police.

Not everyone needs to disappear to Cambodia either. Back then you could just drive 8 hours and be in a different state and start a new life. Very difficult for authorities to track you back then. Cash economy, no digital identification, no criminal databases that could be accessed nationally, transient workers moving around the country for employment, no syndicated media to spread information instantly, etc etc

True, around 1979-81, I had school friends (a pair of brothers) whose parents would book them into private schools, accrue debts and then a couple of years later move to another state.

 

[newbie11]

Letters from Dandenong;

Police made a statement in 1992 that because of advances in fingerprint technology they had been able to match them to a man and that they had discovered that he wrote the letters as a joke when he we was a teenager, due to the time that had passed they had decided not to press charges..ect.ect

^I’m calling bull**** on that statement!^

Despite the resources that have been wasted, the money wasted, the years of investigative effort wasted, the added suffering to Jim and Nancy.. forget even the morality of it all ..

You don’t think that he maybe owes at-least some community service?

Anyways, none of that is what I’m even calling into question,
The part that I am interested in is;The advancement in latent print technology.
What tech are they referring to that they had available to them, that would of facilitated the matching of this print to a suspect?

I mean; CODIS wasn’t even invented until 1999, and the NAFIS system in Australia we wouldn’t even start using until about mid 2001.

Correct me i’m wrong but if your manually comparing fingerprints; your not exactly going to be finding very matches if you haven’t already got a suspect or suspect(s) your looking to compare them to?

 

[handle the truth]

Theoretically, if one was to contemplate snatching children in a highly visible public place, one would likely make changes to things about themselves to ensure any witnesses would throw authorities off their scent.

Perhaps the 'limp' or exaggerated gait was something that wasn't part of their normal behaviour?

Keyser Soze, anyone?

I do not think the Children would have safely gone with someone that had a physical impairment.

 

[handle the truth]

Yes, there is a person who "names names" and has repeatedly claimed to know the Beaumont burial site. I'm pretty sure I know who you're referring to.

But I still think a murderer/abductor would be a fool to bury his victims on his own property.

That's where people who thought Harry Phipps was the culprit have gone astray. Two excavation digs were done at Phipps' Castalloy site with nothing found, and the Stansbury property now owned by a relative of Andrew and Max McIntyre is considered a useless supposed 'lead' by police.

If anyone was indeed ever buried inside the Stansbury property's sinkhole, the culprit/s would have removed the bodies by now to escape conviction.

A certain someone will tell you that there's bodies buried all across Adelaide. He has become obsessed by his own theories and now he even does his own digging to reveal stuff, yet he has still come up with nothing, even though he was in Adelaide on the day of the disappearance and has had decades to provide proof of his claims.

He's got nothing and he will only waste your time if you give him an audience.

It is a very well known fact that serial killers and some Murderers bury their victims somewhere close to keep the site in close view to the Perp, it is all about Control as is everything with these sickos. If you listen to Andrew he does state that Munro was scared and thought that Max was going to knock him off so he told Andrew where the children are buried in the sink hole.
It is a chance that the bones could have been moved as anything is possible as we do not really know.
But what we do know is that the Bodies have not been found and you have more than 1 person saying that they are at the Sinkhole.
If you have a look at a recent case here where a Man buried his wife under concrete in Maitland on the YP and told the police 25 years ago his wife up and left after several arguments only to find 24 years later she was buried under the driveway of the property where he and the family lived.

 

[newbie11]

It is a very well known fact that serial killers and some Murderers bury their victims somewhere close to keep the site in close view to the Perp, it is all about Control as is everything with these sickos. If you listen to Andrew he does state that Munro was scared and thought that Max was going to knock him off so he told Andrew where the children are buried in the sink hole.
It is a chance that the bones could have been moved as anything is possible as we do not really know.
But what we do know is that the Bodies have not been found and you have more than 1 person saying that they are at the Sinkhole.
If you have a look at a recent case here where a Man buried his wife under concrete in Maitland on the YP and told the police 25 years ago his wife up and left after several arguments only to find 24 years later she was buried under the driveway of the property where he and the family lived.

That doesn’t add up or make any sense to me whatsoever ( the part about Munro telling Andrew where the bodies were buried because he was afraid that max might knock him off)

^because it would only be implying 1 thing; that Max killed the children and Munro was the ‘unwitting accomplice’ along for the ride- so to speak) weather that was due to fear for his own life/ whatever)..

But,that’s not the story that’s being alleged at all, in fact, it’s completely the opposite.

Munro confiding to Andrew where the bodies are buried because of the fear he would no longer be around - is absolutely nonsense. It is a suggestion of 1 thing, and 1 thing only;

A guilty conscious because of the (knowledge that he has.) and (not the guilt of an individual who committed the crime).



Munro abused Andrew

Andrew is a victim of Munro

Andrew said that he saw Munro bring the bodies to the house.

what you are suggesting is that Munro was then trying to lie about the story to Andrew and play the role of the ‘Victim’ to his own victim, knowing full well that Andrew already saw with his own eyes a completely different story? Utter rubbish.

Your either completely confused and don’t know what your talking about, or your embellishing a story or simply straight up lying. None are helpful, smart or a very wise thing to do, people pick up on lil details like that, and every-time that happens .. the whole story, no matter how true it might be or not - will just lose more and more credibility.


Also “serial killers tend to bury on their property”
You are uninformed, that is not true and not a well known fact at all. It is only more likely dependant on the type of the murder.
Pre-planned, yes, it is more likely.
In the crimes we are talking about here;
It’s actually the opposite- These are crimes of opportunity, and as such it’s far less likely that the children would be buried on their own property.

The facts are the facts. You can’t twist them to suit a narrative you want people to believe. They are the facts. You are literally trying to intentionally fool people with falsified information into believing what you are saying. That is not okay.

 

[MikhailDxd]

Whilst I was reading once more the media and witness accounts of AO one comment came up. A cross dresser or transexual was there near toilets but police dismissed their presence on the basis that no perp would willingly bring attention to themselves by being dressed that way. They treated it as being irrelevant

Of course in hindsight what we now know is that one or more transexuals were linked to the family murders. Bevan Spencer seemingly has a link to Frank Bone. And a transexual was prominent enough to be mentioned by police.

I know the family murders are much later and involve mostly teen boys. I'm getting bad vibes though that something akin to a forerunner of the family existed as early as 73

The guy was supposedly on a footy trip from Victoria and lost a bet so that was his excuse for dressing up as a woman.

 

[Deni]

If you walk with a stoop the bottom half of your body is forward of the top half with slouching back position. It makes the arms swing very much like an ape as described in the crazy walk witness re Beaumont. OMG is that a link between the two cases??

Maybe he had a stoop because he was carrying the child and he might not have been a big man..
I know when I get a 15 kilo bag of kitty litter out of the boot I walk that way?

 

[Deni]

Andrew said that he saw Munro bring the bodies to the house.

Andrew didn't see the children at all, only his two sisters Ruth and Clare saw them, allegedly..
Although I don't believe a word they say anymore, not after their sister Rachel came on the
scene, her and her bull**** ruined their story of the BC..

 

[Deni]

Snatching 3 children in a public place in public holidays

It wasn't a public holiday back in 66', that didn't come in for a few years later. Which is why the postie was working that day..
It was still in the school holidays though!!

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Maybe he had a stoop because he was carrying the child and he might not have been a big man..
I know when I get a 15 kilo bag of kitty litter out of the boot I walk that way?

Yeah I considered that BUT the testimony was he saw him promptly follow after the children first (which probably first attracted his attention ) and from that perspective he referred to the stoop in normal walk unimpeded by carry

 

[Deni]

There was also a family in a railway town in regional SA who were adamant that a family that moved there next door had 3 foster kids matching BC.

There is a person on another forum that is convinced the B children were taken by friends of their mother to keep them safe from their Uncle Max..
One of those alleged children has been in touch with me, we've spoken back and forth for a little while now.."Grant" (not his real name) has posted on this other forum as has his niece complaining about the things this person has been saying about their family..
What I had to laugh at was when he gave his research to the police handling the matter and he said he'd read it and get back to him, if memory serves the copper never contacted him and when he called them to ask why, he was told his findings were being filed away for future use if ever needed..
I know exactly what that means, it's been thrown in the garbage where it belonged lol...

But he is in no way Grant Beaumont, and his sisters aren't Jane and Arnna.
They were not adopted and they can prove all of that, their parents are their biological parents.
This person is even using their parents names for anyone to see.
Ivé been on the net since about 1999 and in all that time I have never come across a more
narcissistic, vile, sick, individual as this one!!

He's the type of person who says:
That didn't happen...And if it did, it wasn't that bad. And if it was bad, it's no big deal. And if it is a big deal, it's not my fault. And if it was my fault, I didn't mean it. And if I did mean it, you deserved it.

 

[newbie11]

Andrew didn't see the children at all, only his two sisters Ruth and Clare saw them, allegedly..
Although I don't believe a word they say anymore, not after their sister Rachel came on the
scene, her and her bull**** ruined their story of the BC..

That’s interesting, I believe he may of personally told me a different version of events then; perhaps I’m remembering incorrectly .. I’ve still got what he wrote, will have a look and let you know

 

[johnymac1]

There is a person on another forum that is convinced the B children were taken by friends of their mother to keep them safe from their Uncle Max..
One of those alleged children has been in touch with me, we've spoken back and forth for a little while now.."Grant" (not his real name) has posted on this other forum as has his niece complaining about the things this person has been saying about their family..
What I had to laugh at was when he gave his research to the police handling the matter and he said he'd read it and get back to him, if memory serves the copper never contacted him and when he called them to ask why, he was told his findings were being filed away for future use if ever needed..
I know exactly what that means, it's been thrown in the garbage where it belonged lol...

But he is in no way Grant Beaumont, and his sisters aren't Jane and Arnna.
They were not adopted and they can prove all of that, their parents are their biological parents.
This person is even using their parents names for anyone to see.
Ivé been on the net since about 1999 and in all that time I have never come across a more
narcissistic, vile, sick, individual as this one!!

He's the type of person who says:
That didn't happen...And if it did, it wasn't that bad. And if it was bad, it's no big deal. And if it is a big deal, it's not my fault. And if it was my fault, I didn't mean it. And if I did mean it, you deserved it.

I've seen that page, cant say I've sat down and read the whole lot. I basically skimmed it, looking for signs where they have bagged police. I cant say if their files made it to the trash.. but would imagine the SA gov has a big-assed incinerator.

 

[handle the truth]

That doesn’t add up or make any sense to me whatsoever ( the part about Munro telling Andrew where the bodies were buried because he was afraid that max might knock him off)

^because it would only be implying 1 thing; that Max killed the children and Munro was the ‘unwitting accomplice’ along for the ride- so to speak) weather that was due to fear for his own life/ whatever)..

But,that’s not the story that’s being alleged at all, in fact, it’s completely the opposite.

Munro confiding to Andrew where the bodies are buried because of the fear he would no longer be around - is absolutely nonsense. It is a suggestion of 1 thing, and 1 thing only;

A guilty conscious because of the (knowledge that he has.) and (not the guilt of an individual who committed the crime).



Munro abused Andrew

Andrew is a victim of Munro

Andrew said that he saw Munro bring the bodies to the house.

what you are suggesting is that Munro was then trying to lie about the story to Andrew and play the role of the ‘Victim’ to his own victim, knowing full well that Andrew already saw with his own eyes a completely different story? Utter rubbish.

Your either completely confused and don’t know what your talking about, or your embellishing a story or simply straight up lying. None are helpful, smart or a very wise thing to do, people pick up on lil details like that, and every-time that happens .. the whole story, no matter how true it might be or not - will just lose more and more credibility.


Also “serial killers tend to bury on their property”
You are uninformed, that is not true and not a well known fact at all. It is only more likely dependant on the type of the murder.
Pre-planned, yes, it is more likely.
In the crimes we are talking about here;
It’s actually the opposite- These are crimes of opportunity, and as such it’s far less likely that the children would be buried on their own property.

The facts are the facts. You can’t twist them to suit a narrative you want people to believe. They are the facts. You are literally trying to intentionally fool people with falsified information into believing what you are saying. That is not okay.

What are you talking about??
AM has made a statement and also Stuart Mullins has had extensive reporting and investigation on HP. If you look at his latest video on You Tube he comes up with some pretty damming information that points the finger at Phipps and "Others" that were likely involved eg AM and MM but he didn't mention those names. He also Mentions a dummy grave a Red Herring hole dug to make others think of that location instead of somewhere else.
Haydon Phipps said they are digging in the wrong place and they are in the Sand pit at the other end of the Factory. I have looked at Ariel photos over the past decade or so and it would seem the sand pit has been replaced by a huge tree. Kind of suspicious in the middle of an industrial site!
And it has been found out that Phipps Mcintyre and Munro were all associates around the time of the kidnapping.
So my guess is they are at either The Sand pit area or the sinkhole take your pick!
So now before you go shooting your mouth off do some research...Door Handle!!

 

[handle the truth]

That doesn’t add up or make any sense to me whatsoever ( the part about Munro telling Andrew where the bodies were buried because he was afraid that max might knock him off)

^because it would only be implying 1 thing; that Max killed the children and Munro was the ‘unwitting accomplice’ along for the ride- so to speak) weather that was due to fear for his own life/ whatever)..

But,that’s not the story that’s being alleged at all, in fact, it’s completely the opposite.

Munro confiding to Andrew where the bodies are buried because of the fear he would no longer be around - is absolutely nonsense. It is a suggestion of 1 thing, and 1 thing only;

A guilty conscious because of the (knowledge that he has.) and (not the guilt of an individual who committed the crime).



Munro abused Andrew

Andrew is a victim of Munro

Andrew said that he saw Munro bring the bodies to the house.

what you are suggesting is that Munro was then trying to lie about the story to Andrew and play the role of the ‘Victim’ to his own victim, knowing full well that Andrew already saw with his own eyes a completely different story? Utter rubbish.

Your either completely confused and don’t know what your talking about, or your embellishing a story or simply straight up lying. None are helpful, smart or a very wise thing to do, people pick up on lil details like that, and every-time that happens .. the whole story, no matter how true it might be or not - will just lose more and more credibility.


Also “serial killers tend to bury on their property”
You are uninformed, that is not true and not a well known fact at all. It is only more likely dependant on the type of the murder.
Pre-planned, yes, it is more likely.
In the crimes we are talking about here;
It’s actually the opposite- These are crimes of opportunity, and as such it’s far less likely that the children would be buried on their own property.

The facts are the facts. You can’t twist them to suit a narrative you want people to believe. They are the facts. You are literally trying to intentionally fool people with falsified information into believing what you are saying. That is not okay.

Watch what Andrew said about AM and the Sinkhole around the 25 minute mark...you can say sorry you were wrong if you like!

PART TWO -EXPLOSIVE TESTIMONY ON THE BEAUMONT CHILDREN (ANDREW MCINTYRE TESTIMONY)​