Entertainment & Music Cold Cases

I once stumbled upon this case by actually looking at another bizarre case..the Allenstown barrel murders which got solved last year!

After reading the Tamun Shud case it has so much mystery and weirdness to it it's better than any movie ever written.

When someone appears too "weird" at the lack of grief etc. over a loved one the media just pounce on it. Same thing happened with the Chamberlain case, too weird being from a particular religion and a somewhat lack of grief on media = guilty before proven innocent.

I don't agree to the McCann's parent methods (or lack thereof) but I didn't really believe that had done the deed. Really it was a case of bungled police work right from the start.

 

Yes

Andrew Mallard was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Featured on Australian story, I met him a number of times as a friend of my bestie. Tragic ending

Andrew Mallard - Wikipedia

 

Whilst not really a cold case - is anyone here a fan of Forensic Files? I first watched it on Netflix back in 2017 and was totally hooked after 1 episode. You actually don't need a subscription at all as most episodes are legally and freely available on youtube.

I came to really appreciate how well it was written/crafted, made into a documentary type story in framed in 22 minutes or so. The presenter was just brilliant. I only really came to this realisation after seeing some of the same cases being presented on others was just damn awful and poorly packaged.

 

I watch Forensic files, FBI forensic, how to catch a killer and many others on foxtel everyday.

I am addicted to this, the science behind it and how they catch a killer, the bad guys using many techniques. Its fascinating

DNA has been the clincher and now its using geneology Sites, which is relatively new and how they got the Perth/Claremont serial killer, it took I think 30 years.

Basically they just need 3% of a persons DNA to find a killer, a match/a family relative. law enforcement can access this information using these sites.

 

I'm just amazed at how in the 70s/80s/90s police and the scientists had the foresight to keep any potential traces of DNA and also preserve important items i.e. clothing, any items that were "odd" that one day in future DNA would become so mature that they can pinpoint a killer. Had it not been for those with foresight back then, these geology sites etc. would become utterly useless.

I've posed this question on another board but in this day and age, can any murderers really "get away with it" knowing how advanced forensic science and DNA tracing/detection is? You just wont get away with it! This is not to mention the huge number of CCTVs installed also nowadays. Remember the murder of Jill Meagher? One of the key points in tracing the killer was actually CCTV footage of a shopfront.

 

Thinking same as you, I think DNA will get you at the end. Just getting harder to get away with it. Problem is there are so many cold cases but not enough resources

 

Just found this thread - interesting stuff indeed.
I have always thought how easy it could be to be framed because of DNA. It seems as soon as DNA is found case closed.
I'm probably very far from what actually happens but to the untrained numpty - Imagine if your DNA was found at a murder site and you had never been there

 

Its only recently law enforcement started using ancestry sites with great success, prior to this the only way to link the DNA to the person who committed the crime was if their DNA was on a Police?data base

when DNA is found and identified then they dig deeper, where did this person live at time of offence, girlfriends/wife, cars owned, phone records ....... list goes on...... and they build a case. There will always be other evidence besides DNA. For example in a case I watched, they found victims blood in a vehicle which was once owned by the offender.
They just keep digging

The forensic side is fascinating

 

Sometimes they're so high on antidepressants that they can barely show any emotion at all.

The Chamberlain case was a weird one, I must admit. It is possible for a wild dog to do what they said and even proven with a case on Fraser island where a dingo grabbed an infant by the skull from a camper van. I reckon someone found the deceased infant and disposed of it, finding the clothes and no remains was strange but stuff like that is horrific for any parent to see.

I think if you knew the system you could do things to tamper or dilute the DNA but everything you do these days is pretty much traceable. Police can track your phone from phone tower records, track when you fill up with fuel via credit card or bank records, get petrol station cctv footage to prove it was you, even traffic camera footage can be recalled.

 

Four people have gone missing within a 60km radius in the past year. Their fate remains a mystery

Without a trace..

 

Jeeze I will read the whole artical a bit later - I won't be going camping there though that's for sure

 

I am amazed at cctv footage, I was once against this, but its proven to be a great way to catch the badies

 

This
Search for missing Belgian backpacker Theo Hayez ends as case referred to NSW coroner

Apparently have discovered bone a couple days, not sure whether they are his remains

 

I wasn't old enough to follow the Chamberlain case but from a doco I think 60 minutes..what threw the case wide open was that the NT police allegedly found "blood" in Michael Chamberlain's car (passenger seat and boot) and it turned out to be paint or rust? LOL. Imagine if it happened TODAY, would this have created any "fanfare"? You'd probably likely get a lot more mobile phone camera pics with sightings of dingos.

If anyone has watched Forensic Files, I've learnt how an*ally thorough and detailed forensic scientists need to be. The specs of blood on walls or clothing they've actually found at murders sights is seriously minuet....

 

This was high profile case in WA, my opinion is he got away with murder. Being a lawyer helped

police also stuffed up

https://www.watoday.com.au/national...yney-not-guilty-of-murder-20121101-28m7k.html

 

I think police stuffed up big time with Claremont serial killer

Now convicted, murderer.... so many holes

Claremont killer convicted of murdering two women but judge rules not enough evidence in 'likely' third case

 

Not a cold case, but I recently watched the Chris Watts murder case. It just highlights how far/much technology has come straight up from the get go on the investigation. From the moment Colorado police were called in with their personal video cameras on duty (presumably worn and recording from their uniform/jackets) it was pretty clear how clear cut the case was. You then have video evidence from the neighbour across the street (slam dunk evidence imho and the one that really was the last nail in the coffin). The credit card transactions with the mistress, the online chats / social media between Chris Watts and wife/mistress/tinder apps was all pretty telling as well.

My point - these days, even before you pull out the DNA evidence there is a plethora array of evidence (cameras literally everywhere) and social media texts etc. to all corroborate with DNA.

Had this been in the pre personal video cam era this would easily fall into the cold case basket. Back in the 70s/80s/90s, if you use this case as an example it would have purely relied on personal accounts of things and witness statements which now as you know are pretty unreliable at the best of times.

Does anyone also notice what was largely pretty heavily relied upon in the past as evidence doesn't bear as much weight these days? For example, lie detectors - not that they were ever used heavily as such scientifically but now largely just used as a precursor to see how much a potential suspect is really feeling? Bite marks were also once somewhat used as scientific, now not so much and last but not least witness accounts - many cases have been proven eyewitnesses statements as inaccurate.

 

Technology certainly changed things

I was once against cameras..... big brother etc... now one of the best tools available to catch criminals

Chris Watts murder case shocking. Hard to fathom how he was able to do this

 

Especially killing the kids! I'd die for my kids....let alone harm them!

IMHO Cameras are one of the best investments ever, we can thanks sensor miniturisation and development for that! I recall working in a retail shop that had a relatively expensive CCTV system back in the late 90s only thing being that it was recorded onto tape. It's pretty interesting how small/not so obvious things can be caught on tape only to find something more sinister later on (internal theft).

I've got 4 cameras at home, all our cars have front and rear cameras. Pays for itself I reckon. Thing is you never know what cameras can assist in - perhaps not yourself but look at the Jill Meagher case, one of the first pieces of evidence came from a CCTV shop camera that faced the street. Personally I've had a relative provide evidence to a neighbour of parcel theft (courier stole it).