1422 users online (271 members and 1151 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 39
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    He could also have a sexual dysfunction or deformity, been laughed at or rejected in a humiliating way by women or girls before. He could have raped, but did not, yet still managed to ejaculate. It was all about humiliation, perhaps, his own and subsequently that of the victims.

    I don't think this was sheer opportunity, it's too great a coincidence that the girls acted out of character - Christine going off on her own, the girls going off in the 'wrong direction' - and then ended up dead. I am pretty convinced that Christine had encountered him before, possibly that same day if not on previous visits.

    It's just a guess - but I'm thinking Christine was the primary victim. I do think he clobbered Marianne first, to keep her out of the way while he attacked Christine, as I cannot imagine Marianne standing there and watching like a mullet (as she did in the re-enaction). But during or after Christine's attack, Marianne came to and managed to get away into the hills. This would have enraged him.. hence the overkill: rage and control-assertion.

    Here's a thought - how'd the police know Marianne ran away -screaming-? Did the younger children hear her? Another witness?

    I agree with the notion he'd have killed again. I think these could well have been his first murders, but they would -not- be his first sexually motivated crimes. He'd be a peeper, a stalker, I somehow doubt direct rape (or he'd made attempts and failed). If he did indeed directly lure one or both girls out into the hills (possibly over a period of time), then he'd be patient and manipulative as well.

    For sure, he'd have returned to the spot at some stage. Not sure about self-insertion, I feel he was probably a bit wary of police, already. But I feel he likely visited the site.

    And yes, committed other murders. Very likely, he did. First locally to wherever he lived (he might not have lived in the area, could have been visiting, but I tend to think a local) and then further away as his confidence grew, or he moved homes.
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    On January 29, 1966, a cleaning lady named Wilhelmina Kruger was killed in the Piccadilly Arcade in Wollongong. Her body was discovered by a casual butcher when he arrived to work at the local butcher shop.She had been Strangled & Mutilated.Police believed that the murder might have been the work of the Wanda Beach killer, but would not say why.

    On February 17, 1966, a prostitute named Anna Dowlingkoa went missing after leaving a nightclub in Kings Cross. Ten days later, her Mutilated body was found by a truck driver at the side of a road in Menai. Police immediately linked her murder with that of Wilhelmina Kruger. Again, they believed that the murder might have been the work of the Wanda Beach killer, but once again, would not say what led them to believe this. The murders of Wilhelmina Kruger and Annya Dowlingkoa are far less well known now than the Wanda Beach murders.


    http://www.australianmissingpersonsr...ockSchmidt.htm


    I'm really curious as to WHY! Perhaps there was something of a signature going on?
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by Ausgirl View Post
    He could also have a sexual dysfunction or deformity, been laughed at or rejected in a humiliating way by women or girls before. He could have raped, but did not, yet still managed to ejaculate. It was all about humiliation, perhaps, his own and subsequently that of the victims.

    I don't think this was sheer opportunity, it's too great a coincidence that the girls acted out of character - Christine going off on her own, the girls going off in the 'wrong direction' - and then ended up dead. I am pretty convinced that Christine had encountered him before, possibly that same day if not on previous visits.

    It's just a guess - but I'm thinking Christine was the primary victim. I do think he clobbered Marianne first, to keep her out of the way while he attacked Christine, as I cannot imagine Marianne standing there and watching like a mullet (as she did in the re-enaction). But during or after Christine's attack, Marianne came to and managed to get away into the hills. This would have enraged him.. hence the overkill: rage and control-assertion.

    Here's a thought - how'd the police know Marianne ran away -screaming-? Did the younger children hear her? Another witness?

    I agree with the notion he'd have killed again. I think these could well have been his first murders, but they would -not- be his first sexually motivated crimes. He'd be a peeper, a stalker, I somehow doubt direct rape (or he'd made attempts and failed). If he did indeed directly lure one or both girls out into the hills (possibly over a period of time), then he'd be patient and manipulative as well.

    For sure, he'd have returned to the spot at some stage. Not sure about self-insertion, I feel he was probably a bit wary of police, already. But I feel he likely visited the site.

    And yes, committed other murders. Very likely, he did. First locally to wherever he lived (he might not have lived in the area, could have been visiting, but I tend to think a local) and then further away as his confidence grew, or he moved homes.
    Its not coincidence, he was at the beach that day for a reason , though he could've been someone stalking the dunes for just that opportunity.

    When they were where he felt comfortable, he attacked, it may've been a blitz style attack, if that's the case, then you have even more to go on.

    Blitz attacks are usually the result of uncertainty on part of the offender, usually because something physically or psychologically limits them. They lack the ability to gain access to a victim through ruse or con . That's because they feel the victim notices, the abnormality .

    If it were a physical limitation, such as a handicap, I He most likely wouldn't be able to control 2 victims, especially without any bindings , I also feel it would've made the killer more obvious , more people would most likely see someone with a noticeable physical disability roaming the dunes that day..

    So if he did blitz the girls, than I feel there's some other disability that the offender, may be dealing with , I feel you are looking at someone with something like a speech impediment

    He didn't feel he would've been able to con the girls to go with him willingly , even though they apparently didn't have any compunction about leaving the children alone, to go off into the dunes together.

    If that's the case, he most likely bludgeoned Marianne 1st then attacked Christine, , when Marianne got up to run, he chased her caught her and stabbed her .. dragged her back to the dunes, where Christine was already dying or dead , where he then attempted to sexually assault them but couldn't. Perhaps because of sexual dysfunction.

    As far as other crimes, id expect to see possible attempted rapes in his past , because hes most likely a local ANY attempted rapes in the area should be scrutinized . Probably has done some time , Precipitating stressor or triggering event prior to the murder , overbearing /abusive mother.

    These types usually have a past history of bedwetting, or cruelty to animals (sometimes small children )

    Almost certainly committed further crimes most likely of a sexual nature

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    A blog post here, regarding Wilhelmina's murder, with some interesting comments below it (especially regarding mutilation). The author also documents some of the wilder rumours surrounding the case. It seems fairly certain Wilhelmina was actually badly mutilated, however.

    http://forgottenillawarra.wordpress....adilly-murder/

    That the Wanda beach murders were firmly linked with Wilhelmina's in the minds of the police is evident here, where a Cairns man is questioned over both cases:

    http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/107031509
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    Good thoughts, Rich!

    Perhaps, though, a blitz style attack could have resulted from there being two victims who both needed to be controlled and very quickly. He might have been good-looking or charming enough to lure Christine or both girls out to the hills via an earlier meeting with Christine.

    Just some further thoughts: I doubt his primary interest was rape alone, my feeling is that he was very comfortable with idea of a dead body and gaining a sense of total control that way.
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    Sorry for post-spam. Just a few further thoughts jotted down while to they come to me:

    -- Time spent with victims = risk, especially in murders in public areas. Therefore, I tend to look very closely at things killers do *despite* that doing so extends their time at a crime scene and therefore risk of being caught.

    The killer took the time after the girls were dead to mess with their clothes and get a sexual thrill, and this suggests things we've discussed already. But in short, sexual thrills gained (once both victims were incapacitated/dead) were a priority, that's pretty much a given.

    He also took the time to drag Marianne back to Christine's location and then bury both girls in sand. This is curious to me. If he wanted to shock the police or make sure the girls were humiliated, he would not have covered them up. Was it a sense of shame (I dislike the term 'remorse' in these cases, shame is a better fit, IMO) for what he'd done?

    Having the girls together in the same place was important to him, too -- perhaps it was just that the burial site was well out of view. This may suggest he'd checked it out for that purpose at some stage. Or maybe he just liked having them together there while he played out whatever sick fantasies he was imagining.
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by Ausgirl View Post
    Good thoughts, Rich!

    Perhaps, though, a blitz style attack could have resulted from there being two victims who both needed to be controlled and very quickly. He might have been good-looking or charming enough to lure Christine or both girls out to the hills via an earlier meeting with Christine.
    A good comparison to this case would be David Carpenter AKA the "trailside killer" (who also had a speech impediment BTW). Carpenter, knew his stutter, would put people off, he was embarrassed by it , so he hunted around trails in the woods, till he came across victims, he'd then assault and shoot.

    The difference was that he (Carpenter) had a gun to gain control , but he still felt he needed to blitz victims, the offender in this case, had a knife, therefore he would've had to render at least one girl incapable to render aid while he assaulted the other. If he just produced the knife and tried to order them, I cant see one not making a break for it , because she apparently did at one point .


    Just some further thoughts: I doubt his primary interest was rape alone, my feeling is that he was very comfortable with idea of a dead body and gaining a sense of total control that way.
    See its not an "interest", ..its hatred, combined, with a need to sexually dominate, , control, and humiliate . Sex in this case, isn't his desired goal, its an extension of his arsenal that day. They were going to pay, for whomever snubbed him, for what mom did to him, for any woman, who ever sneered at him, any female who ever made a big deal about his sexual dysfunction.

    Sorry for post-spam. Just a few further thoughts jotted down while to they come to me:

    -- Time spent with victims = risk, especially in murders in public areas. Therefore, I tend to look very closely at things killers do *despite* that doing so extends their time at a crime scene and therefore risk of being caught.
    Hey I do the same thing sometimes, ...Risk is a HUGE factor in investigation, it tells you both about the offender, and what actions the victim took for them to become a victim .

    The entire, crime is VERY HIGH risk for the offender, 2 victims, broad, daylight, at populated beach, with children in tow (whether he knew that or not), Attacking victims, with a knife, which means , possible struggle, who most likely would be screaming, breaking cover to drag a victim back to the dunes, and to try to sexually assault dead or dying victims, despite what attention may have been drawn, despite, then to take the time to bury not 1 but 2 dead bodies, right where he killed them!

    The victims, lifestyle seems low risk except for the fact they went into the dunes, ...and not even alone there was 2 of them.

    So he was Very comfortable there , he most likely lives near by, He brought the knife to the beach (now in Australia I wouldn't go to the beach without a howitzer, because just about everything in that country will kill you..=, but I don't know how popular it is to go to the beach with a knife .

    So what you have is mixed presentation of the crime :
    -Weapon brought and taken from the scene (Organized)
    -victims, killed where they are found, no tools to control multiple victims, frenzied attack, body hidden (Disorganized)

    The killer took the time after the girls were dead to mess with their clothes and get a sexual thrill, and this suggests things we've discussed already. But in short, sexual thrills gained (once both victims were incapacitated/dead) were a priority, that's pretty much a given.
    Remember the sexual aspect is just a vehicle, his primary motive appears to be ANGER, there are crime scene photos of it on the internet, the girls bodies weren't positioned, they were left how they died , Christine is on her right side nude up to her chest, bathing suit cut and pushed up , Christine is at her foot still clothed. It wasn't about shock, it was about he was done with them

    He also took the time to drag Marianne back to Christine's location and then bury both girls in sand. This is curious to me. If he wanted to shock the police or make sure the girls were humiliated, he would not have covered them up. Was it a sense of shame (I dislike the term 'remorse' in these cases, shame is a better fit, IMO) for what he'd done?
    No it was most likely a sense of "I don't care if anyone misses them" , or better yet "Hell with them" along with an attempt to hide evidence, possibly some panic at the time.

    This isn't a remorseful creature.

    Having the girls together in the same place was important to him, too -- perhaps it was just that the burial site was well out of view. This may suggest he'd checked it out for that purpose at some stage. Or maybe he just liked having them together there while he played out whatever sick fantasies he was imagining.
    Moreso because THATS where he felt he could commit his crime, when one ran, from his area of comfort, he had to get her back under control, I don't think he planned to assault 2 victims, or you would've seen bindings, possibly a gun to control more than 1, but they were there , the situation seemed, perfect for him, so much so that when one made a run for it , he didn't care about stabbing her out in the open then dragging her back to the dunes.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    McWopetaz Metroplex, Illinois U. S. of A.
    Posts
    4,516
    We know the guy didn't use a gun but we don't know that that he didn't have a gun or imply that he had one.

    Zodiac had a gun at Berryessa but he stabbed the two victims rather than shooting them. If one hadn't lived, we might not have ever known that he had a gun.
    This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.


    Stan Reid

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by STANDREID View Post
    We know the guy didn't use a gun but we don't know that that he didn't have a gun or imply that he had one.

    Zodiac had a gun at Berryessa but he stabbed the two victims rather than shooting them. If one hadn't lived, we might not have ever known that he had a gun.
    Correct, that was an aspect of the maturation of fantasy in the Zodiac case, terror, fear, that's what he feasted on .

    At Wanda beach If he did have a gun, I cant see why he wouldnt then just shoot the victims, since he didn't seem to care about the noise .

    The stabbing was reflective of anger . Even if he did have the gun, there was something he preferred about stabbing his victims,
    Last edited by Kell1; 05-24-2014 at 12:37 PM.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    Rich, this case bothers me. I'm going to ramble on a bit about why, sorry for any repeated thoughts, just talking it out..

    I agree, rage is the motivator, not mere horniness, but the killer chooses a sexual way to vent, his fantasies clearly concern sexual control, and as we've discussed, this does indeed imply some early trauma to his sexual/self identity likely at the hands of an older, parental type figure.

    What bothers me currently is that very dichotomy between organised/disorganised. It's certainly not unknown for a single perp to display both. But we haven't yet taken into account the possibility of -two- killers.. But more on that later!

    Looking at this from a single-perp angle, there sure are many indicators of a disorganised crime. But yes, also indicators that it -could- have been orgnaised, at least in the planning stages.

    This is what makes me think there's a good chance the killer was either quite young, and/or inexperienced with the physical act of killing, or was thrown out by there being two girls and not one.

    The crime -could- have been meticulously planned, with the killer grooming Christine for some time before she 'presented' him with the opportunity he was hoping for. This doesn't mean he was experienced, however, and his blitz-like attacks indicate he wasn't being too careful at that point - loss of control, which is what it was all about. Dragging Marianne back to the burial site may well be him seeking to regain that sense of utter control, to fit a fantasy he'd played out in his head, maybe for weeks.

    I'd expect a rash of missing undies/prowler reports/attempted rapes/actual rapes in whatever area this guy called home, spanning several years. He'd likely be a thief, thrill-seeker in some regard, unpopular, a fringe-friend at best.

    I am holding judgement on the speech impediment for now - just because teen girls (even from that era) tend to shy away from boys with 'something off' about them. Cruel, but generally true. Thus, IF he did indeed lure Christine and Marianne to the hills, I doubt he'd have any impediment to that at all. I'd say he came across as somewhat appealing, or at least utterly harmless.

    The 'deformity' , if there was one, may well have been a perception within him, a twisted self-image (think of Bundy, Kemper), or a real or just perceived sexual malformation.

    He was able to ejaculate, but did not rape. Focussed on sexual violence - but not vaginally rape. This is pretty rare in itself. He covered the bodies -- when I say 'shame' I do NOT mean 'remorse'/pity for the victims, I agree he had none, I am referring to his own shame, loss of control, shame at being unable to rape. If you look at Kemper, he was remorseful in loose way, at times about the girls he killed -- but killed them anyway. They were there, they had to die, the end. This killer could share quite a bit in common with Kemper.. though ofc Kemper -did- rape. Mommy issues out the wazoo.

    Could just be that once he was 'done' and the frenzy passed from him, the sight of the bodies disgusted him.

    I'd expect cruelty of some kind in this man's life. Cats. Sisters. Girls he knew, talking smack about women in general. He treated the victim's body like sex toys, items of pornography.

    I am SO wishing we knew more about the other two attacks linked to this crime. All I know is that in all three cases a victim was dragged after being attacked (was the chase part of his thrill??) and all were mutilated in some way. Also, all in public places, high risk (adrenaline rush, sense of empowerment/.invulnerability).

    If you think about these three crimes, they span the range of stereotypically vulnerable groups: young women/old women/hookers. Like he's sampling victims, if it was indeed the same guy.

    Just pooting thoughts out, heh.
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    Here's an excerpt from a -very- long article reprinted in the link below. It gives a picture of Derek Percy's early life that 100% gels with my own ideas about the Wanda Beach killer as well as many given here. Really, very spooky... All bold parts are bolded by me, and bolded comments in parentheses are also mine.

    ___

    When police from Operation Heats approached the friend, he told them: "One thing that stood out about Derek was that he was very intelligent. Most or nearly all of us at school had to work and study very hard but not Derek." He also noted that Percy was shy and never had a girlfriend.

    (Bingo and bingo again - smart kid, could have planned -organised- ad then lost control -disorganised- and why does a smart kid with not bad looks never have a girlfriend..)


    Banned by his worried parents from playing football, Percy would sometimes borrow a friend's gear for the occasional game, convincing his mate's mother to wash the clothes so he would not be caught.

    -- (Worried, or totally controlling.. clothes are a big deal in many aspects of Percy's early life.. )

    If the Percys were over protective, it was understandable. Their third-born, Brett, died from diphtheria when aged only 10 months. They were to have three surviving sons.

    Derek earned his pocket-money working in the tobacco fields with friends — buying a second-hand red bike with racing "ram's horn" handlebars.

    He carried his sharp knife everywhere, but in country Victoria that did not make him unusual. In the 1960s a pocket-knife was more a tool than a weapon, used to solve a problem rather than create one.

    But when Percy used his to help a mate make running repairs to the sole of a shoe during a handball game, he showed a glimpse into his future.

    "I remember Derek getting his pocket-knife out and telling me that he would cut (the sole) off … Derek began to cut the sole off my shoe and all of a sudden the blade went into Derek's left thigh about three quarters of an inch (about two centimetres). The blade went deeply into his thigh and I recoiled back in surprise.

    "I was amazed that Derek just looked fascinated with what had happened. He didn't scream, cry or really show any sort of emotion that you would expect from someone with a knife in their leg.

    "I thought his reaction was extremely odd," the friend said. "He seemed happy about it."

    -- (Desensitised.. already psychotic or maybe a show of bravado/ego. Scary little booger, anyway.)

    Kiewa Valley's hydro-electric plant was no Snowy Mountains Scheme but it gave tradesmen the chance to raise families in one of Victoria's prettiest spots.

    There was little violent crime in the town of fewer than 2000 people, no need to lock houses or cars. But in late 1964, a small crime wave began: women's underwear began to disappear from clothes lines — and Derek Percy was rumoured to be the thief. Until then he had been a model student and a school prefect, but in 1965 his grades plummeted.

    Ernie Percy threatened to sack any hydro worker who suggested his son was the phantom "snowdropper", but by late 1964 at least two locals knew that Derek was the culprit and that he was much worse than just a petty thief. He was dangerously disturbed and, they believed, a potential killer.

    On a warm Sunday, two teenagers, Kim White and Bill Hutton, walked to a local swimming hole. There they saw what they thought was a girl in a petticoat. Then they realised it was Percy in a pink negligee.

    "Well, at least it fits," one joked to his mate. But any humour was lost when Percy began to slash wildly at the clothing, then cut and stabbed at the crotch of a pair of knickers.


    Hutton could see Percy's face. "I would describe Derek's eyes as being full of excitement, a glazed look, but I recall there was something very cold and sinister in the look," he told police much later.

    The boys told a teacher the next day and were accused of making up stories. They confronted Percy but he denied everything. Most fellow students thought their story was fabricated. After all, Percy was the obedient student and his accusers loved a little mischief.

    The following year Ernie Percy took a job with the Snowy Mountain Scheme and moved his family to Khancoban in NSW, but to allow Derek to finish school at Mount Beauty the teenager boarded with another family.

    The woman who lived next door remembers how the new boarder would watch her hang out washing. One Saturday she took her daughters, then aged seven and nine, to visit a relative. When they returned they found the girls' wardrobes had been rifled through and their underwear and dresses stolen.

    The mother reported the theft to the police, who asked her if she suspected anyone. She suspected Percy but did not want to say so, she admitted years later.

    A few weeks later a local found some of the dresses in a bundle hidden under some bushes. With it was a girl's doll, with the eyes "blinded" and newspaper clippings of women in bikinis. The women's eyes were pencilled out and the bodies mutilated with razor blades. The slashes would match some of the wounds inflicted on the children murdered around Australia in the 1960s.

    The blinded doll belonged to the girl next door to where Percy was living.


    -- (Bingo, many times over. Cruelty, violent fantasies. Now I'm wondering if there's sexual deformity in Percy, or a gender issue exacerbated by social environment -and- mental illness of some kind, maybe even sexual abuse.. In my mind, this sure fits with the Wanda killer's masturbatory behaviour, the positioning of the clothes. Playing sex-barbies with real 'dolls'? Transferring his own sex fetishes onto a dead (compliant) victim?)


    Percy moved from Mount Beauty to join his family in Khancoban after he failed his exams in 1965, a strange result for a student with an IQ of 122.

    -- (Not so strange for high-IQ killers, who are generally profound underachievers. )

    In his entry in the Mount Beauty school magazine he revealed a little of his concealed thoughts. His favourite saying was: "It depends." Perpetual occupation: "Isolating himself." Ambition: "Playboy." Probable fate: "Bachelor." Pet aversion: "Girls."

    When Percy left Mount Beauty the "snowdropping" stopped, only to begin near his new home in Khancoban. There were also reports of a Peeping Tom.

    -- (Bingo.)

    While at Khancoban a neighbour found that Percy had lured her six-year-old daughter into the family caravan to sexually assault her. The girl's father decided to deal directly with Ernie Percy, who promised it wouldn't happen again. And it didn't. At least not there.

    While both parents said they thought their eldest son was shy but normal, deep down they had growing fears.

    One Mount Beauty local said that while Mrs Percy allowed her middle son freedom, the elder brother was kept on a tighter rein. "Derek had to get permission to go anywhere with us outside of school hours and she would question his intentions."

    -- (Funny I should raise Kemper earlier, this sounds a lot like Ed's relationship with his own mother..)

    Ernie Percy would later tell NSW police he had once found Derek dressed in woman's clothing. The parents also found some disturbing sexual writings by their son and immediately burnt them. Later Percy's grandmother found letters filled with "rude" thoughts. Percy denied they were his. Again they were burnt.

    Percy began writing down bizarre and violent sexual fantasies in 1965 — around the time his school grades collapsed.
    He continued the self-incriminating habit for years.

    --(Bingo, rich fantasy life, mind of a planner..)

    Much later police would allege the writings were plans for the crimes he was to commit and directly linked him to the series of unsolved child murders.

    At the end of 1966, having repeated year 11, Percy was ready to leave school. His father also decided to leave the mountains to move into private enterprise. He invested his payout on a Shell service station in Newcastle.

    Derek tried year 12 in a NSW school, dropped out, worked at the service station, and in November 1967 joined the navy, graduating top of his class a few months later.

    Nearly four decades later, detectives started trying to piece together his movements around Australia over the crucial four-year period in the 1960s.

    They knew the Percys often took their caravan to holiday near beaches during yachting regattas. They also could prove Percy was harbouring thoughts of molesting and killing children at the same time as the series of shocking abductions were carried out in four states and territories — and with one exception — all near beaches.

    ....

    After police arrested Percy at Cerberus, they found a diary in which he described his urges to sexually abuse, torture, murder and mutilate children. They also found drawings of naked children and women.

    In one excerpt, Percy wrote he would force one of his victims to drink beer. Autopsy results showed that Mary Sharrock had a blood alcohol reading equivalent to drinking about 300 millilitres of beer.

    In his murder blueprint he wrote about abducting and killing "Two girls at Barnsley", a NSW beach in northern NSW. Police believe it was code for Wanda Beach.

    http://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/percy-derek.htm


    http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-dep...697147754.html
    ___

    Okay.. so Percy moves to suspect #1 in my mind..
    Last edited by Ausgirl; 05-25-2014 at 04:24 AM.
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    Good American podcast detailing some of Percy's past in Pt 1. Warning: some details are quite sickening.

    Pt 2 discusses the Wanda Beach murders.

    http://serialkillers.briancombs.net/...-percy-part-1/

    http://serialkillers.briancombs.net/...-percy-part-2/
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    438

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Ausgirl View Post
    Rich, this case bothers me. I'm going to ramble on a bit about why, sorry for any repeated thoughts, just talking it out..

    I agree, rage is the motivator, not mere horniness, but the killer chooses a sexual way to vent, his fantasies clearly concern sexual control, and as we've discussed, this does indeed imply some early trauma to his sexual/self identity likely at the hands of an older, parental type figure.

    What bothers me currently is that very dichotomy between organised/disorganised. It's certainly not unknown for a single perp to display both. But we haven't yet taken into account the possibility of -two- killers.. But more on that later!
    Correct, which is one aspect of a mixed presentation at a crime, scene however in this case, I don't think youre looking at 2 offenders, if there were youd almost certainly have, better control of the 2 girls . I also feel at least 1 of the girls would've been raped, as it would be unlikely that BOTH offenders were suffering from sexual dysfunctions that prevented them from doing so.


    Looking at this from a single-perp angle, there sure are many indicators of a disorganised crime. But yes, also indicators that it -could- have been orgnaised, at least in the planning stages.

    This is what makes me think there's a good chance the killer was either quite young, and/or inexperienced with the physical act of killing, or was thrown out by there being two girls and not one.
    Age can be tricky, there can be a retardation in the criminal maturation process, in certain individuals if they were out of society (locked up) for a period of time... Usually these offenders range in age from 25-40, but take for instance Carpenter, who was locked, up earlier in his criminal career, he was in his 50's when he was committing crimes.

    This offender most likely has a past that includes SOME type of sexual crimes.

    His MO isn't very well developed, he struggled to control 2 victims, his attack was frenzied, and I'mguessing his approach was blitz. Though MO is a dynamic that will change, so its unreliable as a linkage tool, its a good indicator of how criminally sophisticated, our offender is .

    This isn't a well developed MO, so id pin his age in the younger, age bracket, 25-30

    The crime -could- have been meticulously planned, with the killer grooming Christine for some time before she 'presented' him with the opportunity he was hoping for. This doesn't mean he was experienced, however, and his blitz-like attacks indicate he wasn't being too careful at that point - loss of control, which is what it was all about. Dragging Marianne back to the burial site may well be him seeking to regain that sense of utter control, to fit a fantasy he'd played out in his head, maybe for weeks.
    In most cases like this the killer is unknown to the victim, he may've bumped into them briefly that day, possibly followed them, but again this wasn't a well planned crime, no restraints, he most likely would've had a means to dispose of the bodies better.

    My feeling is that he saw 2 girls walking through the dunes, and then moved to intercept their path , now he may've even walked with them for a bit , but when they were in an position of obstructed view, he attacked.


    I'd expect a rash of missing undies/prowler reports/attempted rapes/actual rapes in whatever area this guy called home, spanning several years. He'd likely be a thief, thrill-seeker in some regard, unpopular, a fringe-friend at best.
    Not so much fetish burglaries, if this was a sexual homicide inside a residence, then id say look at fetish burglaries, that fantasy usually manifests itself when an offender becomes accustomed, to prowling through houses, but already has underlying deviant sexual desires.

    this type individual is usually a social inept, I dare even say an anti social (though not completely sociopathic) type . has his own way about him. Will have a history of failed relationships. Sexual assaults on women.

    Sex offenders tend to fall into 1 of 2 categories, ...1) Ritualistic, or 2) Impulsive: Impulsive offenders were opportunistic and generally of lower intelligence and economic means, and their sexual behavior often served power or anger needs. ..(Hazelwood)

    This impulsive nature gets them into all kinds of $hit through out their life, thefts, robberies, possibly arson, history of at least of one of the "homicidal triad" behaviors, Arson/Bedwetting/Cruelty to animals, and most likely something set him off (Precipitating stressor) prior to the crime. though he most likely had either raped or attempted to rape before , this was most likely his 1st murder (though maybe not the last )

    I am holding judgement on the speech impediment for now - just because teen girls (even from that era) tend to shy away from boys with 'something off' about them. Cruel, but generally true. Thus, IF he did indeed lure Christine and Marianne to the hills, I doubt he'd have any impediment to that at all. I'd say he came across as somewhat appealing, or at least utterly harmless.
    Hence why I feel its something not physically obvious, and would explain a blitz style attack. He COULDNT approach them verbally. I don't feel he lured them into the hills, at all, they went on their own, they just happened to walk into his "web" if you will .

    The 'deformity' , if there was one, may well have been a perception within him, a twisted self-image (think of Bundy, Kemper), or a real or just perceived sexual malformation.
    Again why I feel he blitzed them, in cases, where this occuorrs in a discreet location, its because the offender, feels handicapped by his disability, though its not even obvious to their victims.. until they open their mouths that is .

    He was able to ejaculate, but did not rape. Focussed on sexual violence - but not vaginally rape. This is pretty rare in itself.
    No its not actually, in cases, like BTK, Rader masturbated on most of his victims, because he wasn't able to rape them. In cases where you have a sexually dysfunctional offender, it may be the only way .

    Remember with the anger rapist, rape is a TOOL, not a GOAL, it was about doing it TO them, not doing it for himself .

    He covered the bodies -- when I say 'shame' I do NOT mean 'remorse'/pity for the victims, I agree he had none, I am referring to his own shame, loss of control, shame at being unable to rape. If you look at Kemper, he was remorseful in loose way, at times about the girls he killed -- but killed them anyway. They were there, they had to die, the end. This killer could share quite a bit in common with Kemper.. though ofc Kemper -did- rape. Mommy issues out the wazoo.
    I don't think you could milk shame out of this guy at gunpoint, this type HATES women, period. they were basically a canvas for him to do whatever he wanted with, then he haphazardly buried them, simply to delay discovery.

    This Killer would be "lucky" if you will to be half as smart as Kemper was ... Kemper was an organized predator out on the hunt. Kemper wasn't the impulsie type, Kemper was thr ritualistic kind

    "Ritualistic offenders, on the other hand, indulged in paraphilias and compulsive behaviors that satisfied a specific psychological need. As they centered their lives around this activity, they learned to lie and manipulate in order to keep it hidden from others and secretly active....Hazelwood) "

    Kemper was a much more sophisticated animal, and could've went on killing for many more years had he decided not to turn himself in.

    This Killer in comparison, is more like David Carpenter

    Could just be that once he was 'done' and the frenzy passed from him, the sight of the bodies disgusted him.
    Im willing to bet it wasn't ... As a matter of fact id be willing to bet hes gone back there several times just to relive it , its kind of like a fire, because though hes an impulsive type, this fire doesn't suddenly disappear once he takes his rage out on a victim.. it may die down or "smolder" for awhile, until he returns back to life, and the situation, stokes that fire again to the point he feels he needs to take it out on another female.

    This type very well could've went on to serial murder.

    I'd expect cruelty of some kind in this man's life. Cats. Sisters. Girls he knew, talking smack about women in general. He treated the victim's body like sex toys, items of pornography.
    AS I mentioned, earlier at least ONE of the Homicidal triad behaviors ....Again, SEX wasn't the goal even though rape was attempted, it was retribution, they weren't "sex toys" as much as a punching bag so to speak .

    I am SO wishing we knew more about the other two attacks linked to this crime. All I know is that in all three cases a victim was dragged after being attacked (was the chase part of his thrill??) and all were mutilated in some way. Also, all in public places, high risk (adrenaline rush, sense of empowerment/.invulnerability).

    If you think about these three crimes, they span the range of stereotypically vulnerable groups: young women/old women/hookers. Like he's sampling victims, if it was indeed the same guy.
    My initial feeling is that they aren't but I cant say for sure without more info

    Just pooting thoughts out, heh.
    Poot away....

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    Quote Originally Posted by RichKelly View Post
    Correct, which is one aspect of a mixed presentation at a crime, scene however in this case, I don't think youre looking at 2 offenders, if there were youd almost certainly have, better control of the 2 girls . I also feel at least 1 of the girls would've been raped, as it would be unlikely that BOTH offenders were suffering from sexual dysfunctions that prevented them from doing so.
    Gotta agree with you there, Rich. There's a few theories out there re a pair of killers, but looking into them a bit, none really hold water IMO, for reasons you've mentioned.

    Age can be tricky, there can be a retardation in the criminal maturation process, in certain individuals if they were out of society (locked up) for a period of time... Usually these offenders range in age from 25-40, but take for instance Carpenter, who was locked, up earlier in his criminal career, he was in his 50's when he was committing crimes.

    This offender most likely has a past that includes SOME type of sexual crimes.

    His MO isn't very well developed, he struggled to control 2 victims, his attack was frenzied, and I'mguessing his approach was blitz. Though MO is a dynamic that will change, so its unreliable as a linkage tool, its a good indicator of how criminally sophisticated, our offender is .

    This isn't a well developed MO, so id pin his age in the younger, age bracket, 25-30
    Just to add another reason age can be tricky - some young offenders are more 'mature' in the way they kill, having started offending earlier than others.

    I'm pretty sure this would not be his first violent attack, though.


    In most cases like this the killer is unknown to the victim, he may've bumped into them briefly that day, possibly followed them, but again this wasn't a well planned crime, no restraints, he most likely would've had a means to dispose of the bodies better.

    My feeling is that he saw 2 girls walking through the dunes, and then moved to intercept their path , now he may've even walked with them for a bit , but when they were in an position of obstructed view, he attacked.

    I'm taking into the account the 'unexplained' behaviours of the girls that day, as well, though. While Marianne dutifully take the littlies for a swim, Christine goes off on her own for a time. Christine's body contains foods and alcohol not shared by any other child that day. The girls then drag four smaller children 2km on a blustery day up the beach, leave them on their own and head off in the 'wrong direction'.

    Having been a teenage girl once upon a time, it would not surprise me if Christine had met a guy she liked the look of and wanted to see more of him. She'd also visited the beach prior, without Marianne.

    Not saying I'm sold on the notion, but there is IMO a chance there was some prior contact, maybe even a level of grooming.

    Not so much fetish burglaries, if this was a sexual homicide inside a residence, then id say look at fetish burglaries, that fantasy usually manifests itself when an offender becomes accustomed, to prowling through houses, but already has underlying deviant sexual desires.
    Not sure about this. Lotta killers and rapists out there who've had a thing for undies, their mother's or a neighbour's, snowdropping (taking stuff from washing lines), etc, crimes both in houses and outdoors.

    this type individual is usually a social inept, I dare even say an anti social (though not completely sociopathic) type . has his own way about him. Will have a history of failed relationships. Sexual assaults on women.

    Sex offenders tend to fall into 1 of 2 categories, ...1) Ritualistic, or 2) Impulsive: Impulsive offenders were opportunistic and generally of lower intelligence and economic means, and their sexual behavior often served power or anger needs. ..(Hazelwood)

    This impulsive nature gets them into all kinds of $hit through out their life, thefts, robberies, possibly arson, history of at least of one of the "homicidal triad" behaviors, Arson/Bedwetting/Cruelty to animals, and most likely something set him off (Precipitating stressor) prior to the crime. though he most likely had either raped or attempted to rape before , this was most likely his 1st murder (though maybe not the last )
    I've long thought it a mistake to link impulsive sex crimes with low IQ/economic status. Maybe the poorer, dumber ones just get caught more often.


    Hence why I feel its something not physically obvious, and would explain a blitz style attack. He COULDNT approach them verbally. I don't feel he lured them into the hills, at all, they went on their own, they just happened to walk into his "web" if you will .

    Again why I feel he blitzed them, in cases, where this occuorrs in a discreet location, its because the offender, feels handicapped by his disability, though its not even obvious to their victims.. until they open their mouths that is .
    Gotta agree to disagree on the speech impediment thing for the moment, Rich, for reasons given above.

    No its not actually, in cases, like BTK, Rader masturbated on most of his victims, because he wasn't able to rape them. In cases where you have a sexually dysfunctional offender, it may be the only way .

    Remember with the anger rapist, rape is a TOOL, not a GOAL, it was about doing it TO them, not doing it for himself .
    I do understand the tool vs goal thing - I also think this applies to most rapes, murder or not. Ejaculation minus rape in a murder case is statistically pretty rare - and it is a sexual act, not just anger or hate, whatever. In a mind like that, sex and hate are on the same level, become the same thing, and are combined so 'sex motivated' takes on a whole 'nother meaning thabn it does for anyone less messed up. Perhaps the Wanda killer's sexual dysfunction, like Rader, was that he couldn't get it up unless abject violence was involved, the victims subjugated as per his ideal/fantasy and maximum sense of power reached.. but the notion of having coitus with the victim is not at all appealing to him (for whatever reason).


    I don't think you could milk shame out of this guy at gunpoint, this type HATES women, period. they were basically a canvas for him to do whatever he wanted with, then he haphazardly buried them, simply to delay discovery.
    Good point. Though he might have been served better by using the time to put distance between himself and the bodies, if he was that worried about them (and thus himself) being found. Could be he just wanted a more complete sense of 'being done'.

    This Killer would be "lucky" if you will to be half as smart as Kemper was ... Kemper was an organized predator out on the hunt. Kemper wasn't the impulsie type, Kemper was thr ritualistic kind.

    "Ritualistic offenders, on the other hand, indulged in paraphilias and compulsive behaviors that satisfied a specific psychological need. As they centered their lives around this activity, they learned to lie and manipulate in order to keep it hidden from others and secretly active....Hazelwood) "

    Kemper was a much more sophisticated animal, and could've went on killing for many more years had he decided not to turn himself in.

    This Killer in comparison, is more like David Carpenter

    I spent quite a bit of time on Kemper recently, reviewing some interviews and so forth. He was organised, but he was also impulsive in some aspects of his behaviour, he did lose control of himself and at times even let victims go on a whim. Some victims became so out of sheer chance, on which he acted impulsively, ie, did not stalk for a sense of power via familiarity the way Rader did (which was Rader's preferred MO).

    I think there's a chance the Wanda killer was organised (not -as- organised as Kemper though). And that he was also impulsive to a degree, the two are not mutually exclusive.

    I'm not seeing much of Carpenter in this.

    Im willing to bet it wasn't ... As a matter of fact id be willing to bet hes gone back there several times just to relive it , its kind of like a fire, because though hes an impulsive type, this fire doesn't suddenly disappear once he takes his rage out on a victim.. it may die down or "smolder" for awhile, until he returns back to life, and the situation, stokes that fire again to the point he feels he needs to take it out on another female.

    This type very well could've went on to serial murder.
    I'm betting he already was a serial attacker, if not killer. Maybe a first crime. But something tells me it wasn't. An early crime, for sure.

    Where i get the idea of 'post crime repugnance' so to speak, is from my knowledge of paraphilias and how people act before, during and after 'release' (whether that's simply orgasm or something far more complex) - there's often a moment of disgust, which then quickly passes as the person levels out and returns to where it's all just fantasy again (if this makes sense, it's late here). It's not a perpetual state at all, but it does happen immediately after a gratifying act.

    Not sold on it being reality here, but it's not something I'd dismiss off hand, either.

    AS I mentioned, earlier at least ONE of the Homicidal triad behaviors ....Again, SEX wasn't the goal even though rape was attempted, it was retribution, they weren't "sex toys" as much as a punching bag so to speak .
    .. yup, got the sex thing. Again, I don't think sex and hatred can be separated on any level in these cases. But I discussed that a few points back.

    My initial feeling is that they aren't but I cant say for sure without more info
    I'd like more info too. The cops at the time were pretty sure they were linked. I wanna know why. Sadly, that info isn't available, it seems.

    Maybe the perp had a thing about Germans, heh.
    Last edited by Ausgirl; 05-25-2014 at 01:17 PM.
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    6,481
    Oh, I meant to ask - what do you think of Derek Percy as a likely suspect, or at least a good model of the type of offender in this case?
    _____________
    Everything I have posted at this website, past or present, represents my opinion or my understanding of events based on facts that are publicly available.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-11-2017, 11:50 PM
  2. TN TN - Wanda Anderson, 11, Nashville, 15 July 1965
    By ellroy1958 in forum Cold Cases
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-28-2016, 01:51 PM
  3. FL FL - Christine Kaye, 48, Riviera Beach, Oct 2009
    By MeoW333 in forum Cold Cases
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-23-2015, 12:52 AM

Tags for this Thread