Unsolved The Beaumont Children

[johnymac1]

I guess this had to come out sooner or later....
I'm referring to Nancy's other life. For many of us who are long-term students/posters in this case, it's been the 'elephant in the room' we have all known about but have respectfully avoided until recently. I've wanted to discuss this for years, as have many l think.

I think the fact we have not taken recent tacky and disrespectful 'baits' here is a tribute to us all and our authenticity.

I was 12 in 1966 and lived near Glenelg. Police drove down our street calling through a loud hailer. It changed our lives.

In 1966, we had no internet. Our household had no phone, like most. We relied on black n white TV and a paper thrown on our lawn at 7am. Despite these barriers, word of mouth spread within days of Nancy's private life. My very conservative Father said this was not for discussion as we didn't know them.

Nancy and Jim's marriage was none of our business. The only real evidence we have that something may have been amiss was Jane's last note to her parents when she minded her siblings at night. "Grant wanted to sleep in his own bed, so one of you will have to sleep with Arnna". We also have Jane's beautiful comment "l hope you had a nice time wherever you went".
We can read between the lines. Maybe mum and dad were seeking counselling. Maybe the just wanted time alone. Maybe they we making plans to separate.

Those children were clearly loved and adored , especially by Mr B. I have no doubt.

My theory, for whats it's worth, is that the children were left alone far too often because of messy entanglements within the marriage. I think they were at the beach much too frequently, allowing them to befriend goodness knows who. To me, alleged time frames mean nothing that day because of messy evidence.

For Cotton, being gay must have been tough in 66. Having someone to talk too, must have been a comfort for him.
it's not out of the ordinary for a woman to have gay friends.

I look at it a different way, just to confuse matters.

 

[brendan299]

What charges does he have for the pedophilia accusation?

Why dont you ask him.

Or tell us what SAPOL have to say on the matter...

 

[GreyCrow]

Why dont you ask him.

Or tell us what SAPOL have to say on the matter...

His conviction as a 22 year old was against a 17 year old

Unfortunately at the time of his conviction his victim was also charged due to the abhorrent nature of society at the time

His conviction for the indecent assault would be dismissed . The blackmail/extortion would not

Unless you have further evidence of crimes against younger people then the accusation is a lie

 

[JimmyBC]

Sounds like garbage to me however one thing I'll say for Bryza is at least it keeps people talking about the case & making noise.

 

[GreyCrow]

Sounds like garbage to me however one thing I'll say for Bryza is at least it keeps people talking about the case & making noise.

I don't mind it either

I just think if you are on a pursuit for truth then printing the truth should be your 1st priority

Not clickbait

 

[InstinctivelyAlert]

Sounds like garbage to me however one thing I'll say for Bryza is at least it keeps people talking about the case & making noise.

If Bryza could stick to posting factual information, and spend less time making threats to people and their families, people would have a far less negative take away of him. As it stands, put him in the same boat as Cossie.

 

[Inspector Small]

The paedophilia accusation does not stand by modern standards.

The Beaumont children were neglected by at least one of their parents. It’s that neglect that made the abduction possible. It made it easy for a monster to groom and then abduct them.

Were the children given 1 pound and told to go and look after themselves?

 

[brendan299]

His conviction as a 22 year old was against a 17 year old

Unfortunately at the time of his conviction his victim was also charged due to the abhorrent nature of society at the time

His conviction for the indecent assault would be dismissed . The blackmail/extortion would not

Unless you have further evidence of crimes against younger people then the accusation is a lie

So you think that a 22 year old with a conviction against a 17 year old doesnt make someone a Paedophile?

WOW!!!

Do authorities know you condone this type of behaviour? Maybe they should be alerted.

P.S The victim was 15, maybe you should check the police records on this too.

 

[Inspector Small]

Go

So you think that a 22 year old with a conviction against a 17 year old doesnt make someone a Paedophile?

WOW!!!

Do authorities know you condone this type of behaviour? Maybe they should be alerted.

P.S The victim was 15, maybe you should check the police records on this too.

age of consent is 16 years old in nsw. When did a 17 yo become a 15 yo?

 

[brendan299]

Go

age of consent is 16 years old in nsw. When did a 17 yo become a 15 yo?

The defence of paedophilia on here is astounding.

The police records show the victim was 15 even if the Trove records dont show it. If you want clarity - contact SAPOL for confirmation.

 

[brendan299]

Go

age of consent is 16 years old in nsw. When did a 17 yo become a 15 yo?

 

[GreyCrow]

So you think that a 22 year old with a conviction against a 17 year old doesnt make someone a Paedophile?

WOW!!!

This is the clickbait bs . I think its legal . Just as it is today. You think a 22 year old having sex with a 17 year old today is bad? How fuddy duddy of you

Do authorities know you condone this type of behaviour? Maybe they should be alerted.

Go ahead clown

P.S The victim was 15, maybe you should check the police records on this too.

Oh dear

 

[GreyCrow]

The police records show the victim was 15 even if the Trove records dont show it. If you want clarity - contact SAPOL for confirmation.

The onus is on you to prove this

I showed you mine now show me yours or STFU

 

[GreyCrow]

Go do the work or STFU, i dont do shit for you....

I did the work

 

[GreyCrow]

Oh wow, you showed some incorrect reporting from many years ago.

Well done clown, you can use Google. Pity you cannot understand laws around decency or Paedophilia.

The fact you condone people having sex with minors is downright disturbing.

I understand you need to fabricate stuff. Its ok. Your facebook page gets lots of clicks so well done you

I dont think you understand the law. It might be odious at times but it is what it is

Is Ricky Nixon a Pedo?

 

[brendan299]

I understand you need to fabricate stuff. Its ok. Your facebook page gets lots of clicks so well done you

I dont think you understand the law. It might be odious at times but it is what it is

Is Ricky Nixon a Pedo?

For someone who needs to google results, you cannot even google the correct information.

Not sure why you feel the need to condone Paedophilia? Do you feel a connection with some of the folk mentioned?

 

[GreyCrow]

For someone who needs to google results, you cannot even google the correct information.

Not sure why you feel the need to condone Paedophilia? Do you feel a connection with some of the folk mentioned?

Still havent supplied the link to your info? Its ok people see your failure

 

[brendan299]

Still havent supplied the link to your info? Its ok people see your failure

Try the work computer at SAPOL.

It has all the info you require - if you know how to use it properly that is...

 

[Inspector Small]

I will repeat what I said. A 17 year old who has consensual sex with a 22 year old is not considered paedophilia by modern standards in either NSW or South Australia.

You have provided no proof he was 15y.o. Provide that an I will withdraw my statement.

That does not condone your behaviour here.

 

[brendan299]

I will repeat what I said. A 17 year old who has consensual sex with a 22 year old is not considered paedophilia by modern standards in either NSW or South Australia.

You have provided no proof he was 15y.o. Provide that an I will withdraw my statement.

That does not condone your behaviour here.

Can you not read? i have already posted it. The age of consent laws are clear. You can read them again here.

Young People, Sex and Consent in Australia - Factsheet - Legal Services Commission of SA

lsc.sa.gov.au

If you wish to condone Paedophile behaviour as well then this is also concerning.

As for the 15 year old statement - check with SAPOL. Others have done. Greycrow might be able to fire up the old work computer and assist or maybe you can do your own investigating on the matter.

It isnt that hard you know.

 

[Inspector Small]

Can you not read? i have already posted it. The age of consent laws are clear. You can read them again here.

Young People, Sex and Consent in Australia - Factsheet - Legal Services Commission of SA

lsc.sa.gov.au

If you wish to condone Paedophile behaviour as well then this is also concerning.

As for the 15 year old statement - check with SAPOL. Others have done. Greycrow might be able to fire up the old work computer and assist or maybe you can do your own investigating on the matter.

It isnt that hard you know.

Stop obfuscating, man up and tell the truth.

Your link shows again that by modern standards it was legal.

You have provided no evidence he was 15. You pretend to know what is in police files.

Provide the evidence **

 

[brendan299]

Stop obfuscating, man up and tell the truth.

Your link shows again that by modern standards it was legal.

You have provided no evidence he was 15. You pretend to know what is in police files.

Provide the evidence ****

LOL - I dont think i will.

If you cant do your own investigating then thats on you and your level of laziness.

Dont ask others to do your dirty work for you.

Grow some balls and investigate it or climb off your high horse....

 

[InstinctivelyAlert]

LOL - I dont think i will.

If you cant do your own investigating then thats on you and your level of laziness.

Dont ask others to do your dirty work for you.

Grow some balls and investigate it or climb off your high horse....

Hi! Onus is on you to provide this evidence - you’re the one saying you’ve got details to the contrary of what’s publicly known. Curiosity is piqued, let’s see!

 

[brendan299]

Hi! Onus is on you to provide this evidence - you’re the one saying you’ve got details to the contrary of what’s publicly known. Curiosity is piqued, let’s see!

Ask SAPOL. See what they say.

Report back and let us all know.

 

[InstinctivelyAlert]

Ask SAPOL. See what they say.

Report back and let us all know.

Hi, again, you’ve suggested something contrary and provided no evidence, instead moving the goal posts.