Unsolved The Beaumont Children

[Lyn]

Emuboy's theory doesn't have a glitch. All stores on Jetty Road were indeed open for school supplies and everything else. Although it was Australia Day, it was not a public holiday.

There is no proof whatsoever the BC bought food for anyone else other than themselves and their mum. The theory they bought food for anyone else seems to have gained momentum through a certain recent book, which imo is full of inaccuracies, nonsense and lacks credibility.

I think it's great you have a POI, but if you base your theory on inaccuracies people won't take it seriously.

That's interesting to know. Thanks

Most people on here are drawing at straws. Making up theories
My POI is an actual real person in jail and my theories are based on facts, not on a book. A lot of members speak of the money and the shop.

You will take someone serious, who draws ideas out of the air, but not a genuine person, who has a real live poi.
A 20 year sentence is not an inaccuracy,
him volunteering on a sideshow is not an inaccuracy,
being able to groom and manipulate a group of kids, is not an inaccuracy. Working with furnaces is not an inaccuracy,
using money to groom is not an inaccuracy, - big money
his height, build and looks are not inaccuracies.
His rape of two young women are not inaccuracies.
Him forcing bestiality on children is not an inaccuracy.
He is brazen and revelled in risk taking is not an inaccuracy
He is charming, a gentleman and would help anyone. A big softy (to workmates)

The only reason you don't take me seriously is because, there hadn't been huge amounts of information in papers. All those papers that people get glued too and take as gospel. Papers that continually spu out misinformation.

Why? Because he lived in the family home all his life. His parent's house was left for 'the children' to live in for their life. We are sure his mother knew about his crimes, and protected him and possibly covering up where the children are buried, until his death.
They didn't plan on some of his victims working for over 40 years to have him charged.
I called my victim impact statement, the legal walk of freedom. He was untouchable and he knew it.

Please do not say I'm not genuine, it is really hurtful

 

[Lyn]

No, it hasn't.


No, they aren't. If you knew anything about Adelaide society, you'd know that there are a bunch of very weathy people who would love to solve this case, even more so if it meant blowing the lid on other wealthy Adelaide people.

I can't find the original post. So I copied and pasted
protected and privileged elite are most likely behind this case, not a lone perpetrator, unlike the Adelaide Oval abduction, and the truth is still a long way off... The people who perpetrated this crime are very hidden, very powerful, and very vicious. And similar circles exist across Australia today. Anyone who tries to reveal anything gets derailed or discredited.

If you have legitimate, specific information on this case, then we would like to know. Please explain how you deduced this scenario.

 

[geoffjennings79]

I can't find the original post. So I copied and pasted
protected and privileged elite are most likely behind this case, not a lone perpetrator, unlike the Adelaide Oval abduction, and the truth is still a long way off... The people who perpetrated this crime are very hidden, very powerful, and very vicious. And similar circles exist across Australia today. Anyone who tries to reveal anything gets derailed or discredited.

If you have legitimate, specific information on this case, then we would like to know. Please explain how you deduced this scenario.

jason_recliner wasn't claiming that, he quoted the other poster claiming it, but yes strangely the original post has disappeared.

Think this is what you're after?

 

[emuboy]

I have my own POI, but I certainly take others into account. Your theory has a glitch in such, that in the 1960s, no stores that sold school supplies would have been open on a public holiday.
I realise we are considering a different type of person, but I couldn't imagine my father going to the beach, without us kids - especially on a public holiday.
I do believe the children were groomed in weeks leading up to the abduction. I have my theories on how that occured.
I believe he was quite skilled in manipulating groups of children. Gaining Jane's trust and the other younger children followed.
I do believe he took Jane's purse, to aid in his legitimacy to offer to buy lunch and take them home. Building their reliance on him.
I think the amount of food and drink bought, was another ploy to trick the children. Enough to feed the three children, the man and for Mr and Mrs Beaumont.
He had to be able to dispose of three bodies, maybe more, not to be found in over 60 years.
In my scenario, my POI worked with and had 24/7 hour access to furnaces . There is also a property, where I believe evidence is hidden, only to be exposed when my POI passes away and hopefully the house will be demolished.
My poi was being protected, to the degree, that he wouldn't be found out until after death. He would still be flying under the radar, if our 40 year fight for justice wasn't heard.

January 26th 1966 fell on a Wednesday, but was it a public holiday? I remember up until the mid 1990s the Australia Day public holiday would be on the closest Monday to the 26th. If 26th January happened to be on a Monday then this would be the public holiday, but if the 26th fell on another weekday it would just be another working day.

On the day of the Beaumont case, Mr. Beaumont went to visit customers (ironically in Snowtown) as part of his job as a sales representative. The buses seemed to be running on a weekday schedule, the cake shop/bakery was open and one of the witnesses was a postman doing his rounds. All of this suggests it was a normal weekday not a public holiday. It was still school holidays and a hot day, so lots of kids would have been at the beach, along with supervising mothers and fathers who happened to have the day off work, which would explain the crowds at Glenelg that day.

 

[DropBearess]

That's interesting to know. Thanks

Most people on here are drawing at straws. Making up theories
My POI is an actual real person in jail and my theories are based on facts, not on a book. A lot of members speak of the money and the shop.

You will take someone serious, who draws ideas out of the air, but not a genuine person, who has a real live poi.
A 20 year sentence is not an inaccuracy,
him volunteering on a sideshow is not an inaccuracy,
being able to groom and manipulate a group of kids, is not an inaccuracy. Working with furnaces is not an inaccuracy,
using money to groom is not an inaccuracy, - big money
his height, build and looks are not inaccuracies.
His rape of two young women are not inaccuracies.
Him forcing bestiality on children is not an inaccuracy.
He is brazen and revelled in risk taking is not an inaccuracy
He is charming, a gentleman and would help anyone. A big softy (to workmates)

The only reason you don't take me seriously is because, there hadn't been huge amounts of information in papers. All those papers that people get glued too and take as gospel. Papers that continually spu out misinformation.

Why? Because he lived in the family home all his life. His parent's house was left for 'the children' to live in for their life. We are sure his mother knew about his crimes, and protected him and possibly covering up where the children are buried, until his death.
They didn't plan on some of his victims working for over 40 years to have him charged.
I called my victim impact statement, the legal walk of freedom. He was untouchable and he knew it.

Please do not say I'm not genuine, it is really hurtful

Please re-read my post Lyn. It was a very short post and never did l infer you aren't genuine. Of course you are or you wouldn't be wasting your emotional energy on this. I merely suggested you try and get basic facts and scenarios correct in your head so you can align your POI accordingly. For example: if you've been
convinced all along the day was a public holiday, surely this could affect the availability of your
POI if he had a full-time job?

I'm all for new theories and new POIs, especially when someone has close, long-term ties with someone they truly suspect. If this case is ever solved (although l don't think it ever will be) it will be because someone like you has spoken up. So absolutely no offence intended and keep gathering as many facts as you can.

 

[Lyn]

January 26th 1966 fell on a Wednesday, but was it a public holiday? I remember up until the mid 1990s the Australia Day public holiday would be on the closest Monday to the 26th. If 26th January happened to be on a Monday then this would be the public holiday, but if the 26th fell on another weekday it would just be another working day.

On the day of the Beaumont case, Mr. Beaumont went to visit customers (ironically in Snowtown) as part of his job as a sales representative. The buses seemed to be running on a weekday schedule, the cake shop/bakery was open and one of the witnesses was a postman doing his rounds. All of this suggests it was a normal weekday not a public holiday. It was still school holidays and a hot day, so lots of kids would have been at the beach, along with supervising mothers and fathers who happened to have the day off work, which would explain the crowds at Glenelg that day.

I apologise, you are correct. All days probably seemed the same to me back then. My parents had a 7 day a week business. I don't know why I don't remember that. It will stay on my mind now.
Yes, the postman did see them and of course the bus driver, people in the park and the lady at the shop. I don't know if it's fact, but 'the book' says there was a witness who saw the person go into the change room, while the children stayed outside and waited. I haven't heard that one before.
The person it would be great to have a chat with is the girl/woman who was down at the beach, near the children, who witnessed a man calling the Beaumont children.
Agree, being a hot day and school holidays, would account for the apparent swarms of people.
It really is unfortunate, but the probability of SAPOl investigating, on a person reporting they think their father took the children, would be miniscule.
It seems, that unless the report is on one of those high profile peadopholes, then SAPOL swipe it under the carpet. I personally, don't think it was one of these guys

 

[Lyn]

jason_recliner wasn't claiming that, he quoted the other poster claiming it, but yes strangely the original post has disappeared.

Think this is what you're after?

View attachment 1906674

Yes, sorry I meant that person, definately not you. I just couldn't find their post to reply.

 

[Lyn]

Please re-read my post Lyn. It was a very short post and never did l infer you aren't genuine. Of course you are or you wouldn't be wasting your emotional energy on this. I merely suggested you try and get basic facts and scenarios correct in your head so you can align your POI accordingly. For example: if you've been
convinced all along the day was a public holiday, surely this could affect the availability of your
POI if he had a full-time job?

I'm all for new theories and new POIs, especially when someone has close, long-term ties with someone they truly suspect. If this case is ever solved (although l don't think it ever will be) it will be because someone like you has spoken up. So absolutely no offence intended and keep gathering as many facts as you can.

Thankyou for your reply. I did read your post and it came across as me, just creating links to that book and this would result in people not taking me seriously.
Of course, most people will try to connect their person, to what there is out there in media land. The trouble is, what do we know that is factual, other than three children were abducted, never to be seen again. We can't even say for sure if it was from Glenelg. They may have been walking home. It is a bit like Chinese whispers, the story can change.

I was once involved in a situation where around 10 children and adults had to recall an horrific incident to psychologists. The memory of this raises its head once in a while. It was really curious how everyone who witnessed the incident, told it differently. Some were nothing alike. This taught me, minds are singular. What I believe to be true may not be true in others eyes.


It was a good question about if my POI was working that day. I hadn't thought of that. However he always seemed to have a job, where he could choose his hours, or could be away from the workplace and no one would question. He changed his job a lot. I know where he was working at that time, he had keys to the premises and could come and go as he pleased.

He also had a part time job, around the mid 60s, selling Renaware saucepans door to door. Maybe, I don't know, he sold a st to the Beaumont's. Given he had friends in that area, he could have. But that is just a theory.

Thanks again for clarifying.

I am very passionate and determined to collate all the information I can.
When a person has been a long term victim of a child molester, I think they gain an understanding of their traits, the way they groom and trick you; how they gain trust, how they manipulate your silence. They are not the dirty old men, that most people perceive. They are clean, tidy, young, and well liked.

PS. I now have a member of this group, who has contacted me, to help with my research. A person who has a lot more access to information than myself, which I really appreciative of. Here's hoping.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Virtually all evidence regarding this case is known. The key then in solving it and narrow perps is to profile the case if you can.

• Being a 60s case and recidivism at 70% the perps crimes should be known since
• Pedophiles who are also child killers usually have higher incidence of sociopathy and psychopathy per study
• Police at the time believed a connection between BC and AO perps. I suspect that was because both involved multiple children abduction. Rare.
• The lack of concern at being identified in what must have amounted to weeks of grooming suggests sociopathy. Suggests offending history unknown at that time. So too public snatch at AO
• 90% of perps are known to victim.
• the fact there was no resistance by victims suggests that voluntary acceptance of lift by car was involved.
• I agree with the sentiment that perhaps the large food order was linked to taking the kids home and feeding the entire family as ruse but is a theory only
• I've long held view that a possible extra link exists in the the two cases with Ray Gunner Kellys guy with the 'crazy walk' BC case and the assistant curator observation of man with a stoop (AO case)
• 90% are known to victims. How ? Carnival ride employee? Teacher? Associates of victims family? Perps who abduct multiple victims. Older relatives of school friends.

The AO case involved a snatch lacking grooming but the BC case involved a snatch after lots if grooming. Therefore though both may be linked (multiple victims, crazy walk) the BC case grooming and 90% rule suggests a pathway to location the perp is with the pool known to the BC children and now having known crimes

My thoughts

 

[johnymac1]

I am currently reading that book and mentally edit as I go. So many inconsistencies and unsubstantiated claims int it. I have locked horns with SM on social media, because he is determined to frame his narrative based on his own theories.


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

You refer to SM. It took me a moment to work out who "SM" was? the authors SM and BH have blocked me from their FB page.
I haven't seen what they have been posting in a while. I have no reason to read their book of fantasy.
I keep reminding them about the origins of the story. coming from Hayden . I don't believe what he said about his dad.
The other son had no issues with his father. The authors have come up with no supporting evidence that the satin man targeted girls.

 

[johnymac1]

Virtually all evidence regarding this case is known. The key then in solving it and narrow perps is to profile the case if you can.

• Being a 60s case and recidivism at 70% the perps crimes should be known since
• Pedophiles who are also child killers usually have higher incidence of sociopathy and psychopathy per study
• Police at the time believed a connection between BC and AO perps. I suspect that was because both involved multiple children abduction. Rare.
• The lack of concern at being identified in what must have amounted to weeks of grooming suggests sociopathy. Suggests offending history unknown at that time. So too public snatch at AO
• 90% of perps are known to victim.
• the fact there was no resistance by victims suggests that voluntary acceptance of lift by car was involved.
• I agree with the sentiment that perhaps the large food order was linked to taking the kids home and feeding the entire family as ruse but is a theory only
• I've long held view that a possible extra link exists in the the two cases with Ray Gunner Kellys guy with the 'crazy walk' BC case and the assistant curator observation of man with a stoop (AO case)
• 90% are known to victims. How ? Carnival ride employee? Teacher? Associates of victims family? Perps who abduct multiple victims. Older relatives of school friends.

The AO case involved a snatch lacking grooming but the BC case involved a snatch after lots if grooming. Therefore though both may be linked (multiple victims, crazy walk) the BC case grooming and 90% rule suggests a pathway to location the perp is with the pool known to the BC children and now having known crimes

My thoughts

We can't be sure of what happened after the Colley terrace sightings. There was no commotion reported, so we must assume they entered a car or dwelling willingly.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

You refer to SM. It took me a moment to work out who "SM" was? the authors SM and BH have blocked me from their FB page.
I haven't seen what they have been posting in a while. I have no reason to read their book of fantasy.
I keep reminding them about the origins of the story. coming from Hayden . I don't believe what he said about his dad.
The other son had no issues with his father. The authors have come up with no supporting evidence that the satin man targeted girls.

The guy has to have a pedophile profile. HP is amongst the least likely. We don't know he's a pedophile. Hayden is unreliable. Grooming in a public place without fear of detection suggests someone less well known in the area. HP lived there and easily identified. Unlikely

The only thing that remains a concern is the fact that he didn't go into the shop with kids to purchase food. One argument that may be raised about that is that the shop staff knew him. How would they? Perhaps because he was someone like a carnival ride employee and wanted to hide amongst random public but didn't want to be seen by someone who worked there and knew what he did as work too

The different level of concern about being identified possibly allows an argument that shop staff knew him for a local worker OR one of the staff knew him personally

The failure to go into the shop is a major red flag following as it does complete disregard amongst the random public. It's a major lead to identify

 

[DropBearess]

You refer to SM. It took me a moment to work out who "SM" was? the authors SM and BH have blocked me from their FB page.
I haven't seen what they have been posting in a while. I have no reason to read their book of fantasy.
I keep reminding them about the origins of the story. coming from Hayden . I don't believe what he said about his dad.
The other son had no issues with his father. The authors have come up with no supporting evidence that the satin man targeted girls.

I'm also one of the "uncleans" blocked from their FB page. Their book is full of it.

 

[Lyn]

Please re-read my post Lyn. It was a very short post and never did l infer you aren't genuine. Of course you are or you wouldn't be wasting your emotional energy on this. I merely suggested you try and get basic facts and scenarios correct in your head so you can align your POI accordingly. For example: if you've been
convinced all along the day was a public holiday, surely this could affect the availability of your
POI if he had a full-time job?

I'm all for new theories and new POIs, especially when someone has close, long-term ties with someone they truly suspect. If this case is ever solved (although l don't think it ever will be) it will be because someone like you has spoken up. So absolutely no offence intended and keep gathering as many facts as you can.

Virtually all evidence regarding this case is known. The key then in solving it and narrow perps is to profile the case if you can.

• Being a 60s case and recidivism at 70% the perps crimes should be known since
• Pedophiles who are also child killers usually have higher incidence of sociopathy and psychopathy per study
• Police at the time believed a connection between BC and AO perps. I suspect that was because both involved multiple children abduction. Rare.
• The lack of concern at being identified in what must have amounted to weeks of grooming suggests sociopathy. Suggests offending history unknown at that time. So too public snatch at AO
• 90% of perps are known to victim.
• the fact there was no resistance by victims suggests that voluntary acceptance of lift by car was involved.
• I agree with the sentiment that perhaps the large food order was linked to taking the kids home and feeding the entire family as ruse but is a theory only
• I've long held view that a possible extra link exists in the the two cases with Ray Gunner Kellys guy with the 'crazy walk' BC case and the assistant curator observation of man with a stoop (AO case)
• 90% are known to victims. How ? Carnival ride employee? Teacher? Associates of victims family? Perps who abduct multiple victims. Older relatives of school friends.

The AO case involved a snatch lacking grooming but the BC case involved a snatch after lots if grooming. Therefore though both may be linked (multiple victims, crazy walk) the BC case grooming and 90% rule suggests a pathway to location the perp is with the pool known to the BC children and now having known crimes

My thoughts

I read somewhere that sociopaths can become more brazen, take risks,

You refer to SM. It took me a moment to work out who "SM" was? the authors SM and BH have blocked me from their FB page.
I haven't seen what they have been posting in a while. I have no reason to read their book of fantasy.
I keep reminding them about the origins of the story. coming from Hayden . I don't believe what he said about his dad.
The other son had no issues with his father. The authors have come up with no supporting evidence that the satin man targeted girls.

It really makes me angry, that the authors push just one person. It's funny, because all the information in that book, I can replace with my POI. Except the cross dressing and not being married.
In one book, they push girl victims, in the latest one he targets boy. It is curious that, if true he targeted one son, but not the other. Just theory, Hayden may have held a grudge against his dad. There are also a lot of men, who cross dress, or have fettishes. This doesn't make him a child molester/murderer. The authors lean heavily on this information.

 

[Lyn]

I'm also one of the "uncleans" blocked from their FB page. Their book is full of it.

I must be a good girl. I haven't been blocked yet. Lol
I did make a comment, asking why the 'sand pit' hasn't been dug. They replied, they have been trying for many years and for me to get onto the band wagon and write to my local member. I had a giggle, local member - Queensland.
What sand pit? Is it a sand pit in Satin man's home. Surely the current owners would have dug, just for Curiosity sake.
Or is that a piece of information they have put in the book, as bait, to make it all seem genuine.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I'm also one of the "uncleans" blocked from their FB page. Their book is full of it.

Omg how would I go then? I cop crap here (three prong troll fan base) so I'd last 3 seconds there!!!

I think the strategy of HP is rubbish.

I personally think the BC case and AO case are linked. Though the abductions each time were one (likely Errol Radan age 27 for BC, 34 for AO case) I suspect with the number of associates of Hart attached to the AO case that there was a ring involved and probably both. Lured to car for trip home after taking bus money for BC and Hart Van failed rendezvous for AO taking 90 min to go 3 Klm. Yatina maybe. So I suspect ER was linked to SH jail time association with his brother Lyle (SH, FB, TS and ER as members of ring). FB linked to BSVE. TS known to dable in hypnosis. Book with hypnosis found at Yatina. Lyle looks exactly like identakit and I'm told ER even more

Multiple children abductions are very rare. That leads me to likelihood of ring involvement each time to asist after abduction occurred. Yes initial snatch by force of one but i think a ring were waiting in background to meet up.

Read somewhere on social media that MC had long identified ER as likely perp for AO but because he was permanently on detention never to be released there wasn't urgency until he was close to death then they sought to interview him again and dug up a property associated with him.

Things that may still help:

• Crazy walk BC perp. Stoop AO perp case. Stoop certain. Crazy walk only Ray Kelly hypothesis
• Dropped 'eyeglasses' AO case possible mild short sightedness

A clue is also the fact despite the perp being unconcerned by public seeing him he didn't want to go in the shop with kids to buy food meaning staff could possibly recognise him. Ask yourself the question how would someone get an opportunity to groom weeks on end but be worried about staff seeing him? I think he worked as something like a carnival ride operator seasonal work.

I also have concern about age of perp. I recall at least one witness saying he may have been grandfather in AO case rather than father. That's problematic for ER who was 34 only.

 

[Macka_321]

No one knows for sure what happened only the perpetrator. Wasn’t a stranger abduction the children obviously knew the perpetrator well enough to go up to him and start playing with him and with amount of people at the beach that day just blended in with the crowd.

 

[Lyn]

No one knows for sure what happened only the perpetrator. Wasn’t a stranger abduction the children obviously knew the perpetrator well enough to go up to him and start playing with him and with amount of people at the beach that day just blended in with the crowd.

Agree. With all the people down there that day, they also know where to find him.
What strategies could have been used to groom the children prior to and on the day. They trusted him enough, or at least believed him, to go with him.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Agree. With all the people down there that day, they also know where to find him.
What strategies could have been used to groom the children prior to and on the day. They trusted him enough, or at least believed him, to go with him.

I think the grooming went on for a while to build that trust. Either that or already had that trust as known eg teacher

If the kids went to beach intermittently then how could he have known they'd be there? Answer: he worked there on regular shifts such as carnival ride employee and then groomed kids before or after. Seems so obvious now..he had to have a way to impart the grooming that didn't involve random beach visits. That also explains his reluctance to go onto the shop because they knew where he worked, name etc.

 

[Lyn]

I think the grooming went on for a while to build that trust. Either that or already had that trust as known eg teacher

If the kids went to beach intermittently then how could he have known they'd be there? Answer: he worked there on regular shifts such as carnival ride employee and then groomed kids before or after. Seems so obvious now..he had to have a way to impart the grooming that didn't involve random beach visits. That also explains his reluctance to go onto the shop because they knew where he worked, name etc.

Your scenario, fits my POI to a T.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Your scenario, fits my POI to a T.

I was aware of your POI but the profile is worked out independently because it suits the facts.

If what I'm saying is accurate the clue is with sales staff at Wenzels. They must know him or at least one did

 

[PenfoldsFan]

We're told that Jane had a 'boyfriend' at the beach just prior to that fateful day, anyone who's met someone at the beach would know the topic of when you'll be back again would come up which is the perfect cover for a 'ring' or accomplice to have prior knowledge of an opportunity.

Honestly, what are the odds of a child going to the beach unsupervised?
Now shorten that to a child plus 2 siblings unsupervised.
Now shorten that to an unsupervised child that has a recently aquired 'boyfriend'.
And finally, an unsupervised child, with her siblings, who recently aquired a 'boyfriend' at the beach, whom on a subsequent visit to said beach goes on to be part of the most infamous multiple child/siblings disappearance in not only South Australian, not only Australian, but quite likely the entire world.

I dont think Jane hooked up with an adult Carni operator somehow..

The 'grooming' was highly likely to be by way of the 'Boyfriend', who provided the opportunity via an arranged meet, to an adult accomplice who probably played the rols of 'Dad' much like the Carly Ryan murder 4 decades later and a mere 75km away.

 

[Lyn]

I was aware of your POI but the profile is worked out independently because it suits the facts.

If what I'm saying is accurate the clue is with sales staff at Wenzels. They must know him or at least one did

He may not have gone into Wenzels, [if this happened] because the BC were regulars and known. If he went in with the children, Wenzels staff may have asked questions. Most certainly they would have been able to provide a description, or name him. Just a theory
But then again, he flaunted being with the children, to people he asked about the clothes and money. Was he cunning, in where he layed and the people he talked to, making sure they didn't know, or recognise him?
Does anyone know where the Wenzel family lived?
Is the person who served the BC still alive?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

He may not have gone into Wenzels, [if this happened] because the BC were regulars and known. If he went in with the children, Wenzels staff may have asked questions. Most certainly they would have been able to provide a description, or name him. Just a theory
But then again, he flaunted being with the children, to people he asked about the clothes and money. Was he cunning, in where he layed and the people he talked to, making sure they didn't know, or recognise him?
Does anyone know where the Wenzel family lived?
Is the person who served the BC still
alive?

Read an interview with her one time. I'll see what I can find

 

[Lyn]

Read an interview with her one time. I'll see what I can find

That would be great. Thanks