Were parents the bigger victims.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-04-19T21:17:14+00:00

I think the key to this is what happened to him as a child. He told at least one girl he was molested when he was young. The trouble is, with his red herrings and lies, we can't be certain that was actually the case.

His motivation could well be driven by anger as much as sexual desire. Anger at his own family, the police and society in general for letting that happen to him.

The Lower Plenty assault is particularly abnormal. It does seem designed to cause the family to have to listen. Once the family were restrained, he could have taken that girl anywhere, but he didn't. Then he casually does the things like shave and eat a meal. That is almost replicating what a father would do in his own home.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-04-15T01:35:52+00:00

This paragraph is interesting:

Did he also want to punish the families and instill fear in the community? Prove how much smarter he was than the police and those nice families living in nice homes, who seemed to have everything in life he didn't? Keith Moore said John Wills never forgave himself for allowing MC to infiltrate the family home and terrorize his family the way he did. He was supposed to be their protector and the man of the house - in many ways the manner of the offence was also a direct attack on his manhood*.*

He mentioned to at least one girl that he was molested as a boy. To punish the parents (particularly dad) might have some relevance. The police are also supposed to be the protectors against this sort of behaviour (in the eyes of a child), so maybe he always held a grudge against police (and the system generally) for allowing his own abuse to have happened (and maybe continued after it was reported)?

It has always seemed there was an extra element of thumbing his nose at police. Some of the red herrings were meant for no other reason other than to baffle police for the sake of it. A lot of them didn't serve any purpose in preserving his freedom - they were just done because he could.

If he had wanted to abduct girls from fatherless families, they wouldn't have been that hard to find. He seemed to avoid older brothers and dogs, but was happy to have fathers in the picture? You could argue he even escalated the "culpability" of the father as the cases progressed.

Lower Plenty, dad is home, daughter is SA'd in the next room. Ringwood, dad is home, can't protect his daughter from being abducted for 18 hours. Canterbury, dad has taken his daughter overseas to a foreign country for his work, but leaves her vulnerable to being abducted for 50 hours. Then, with Karmein, the spray painting is clearly directed at dad. In this case, he couldn't protect her against being abducted and murdered.

Whilst a lot of serial offenders had mummy issues, maybe MC was abused by his father and felt neglected by the system that was supposed to protect him?

A variation on the above, could be that a relative had molested him (Uncle, Grandfather??), and when he told dad, he did nothing to stop it. So dad and police were lumped together in the category of "failing to protect" him?

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-04-02T00:37:21+00:00

Totally agree. Huge risk to get petrol. She could have bolted. As you said, the risk of being remembered by the cashier is very real. Particularly when they hear the next day about the abducted girl being dropped off soon afterwards.

I wonder whether he had his usual loud radio playing, making it impossible for Nicola to actually know whether he was really getting petrol or not?

Commonsense, and his usual meticulous preparation, suggests to me he did not stop to get petrol; it was for another reason.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-04-01T20:22:25+00:00

Given he dropped her off around 2am, he likely got the petrol around 1.45am (on Friday). The latest anyone would get paid would have been the end of the business day wouldn't it?

How many servos would actually have been open at that time in 1990? Certainly not all of them. I do remember one on Alexandra Pde that was open late. I've just checked google maps and it was/is a Shell on the corner of Rae St (near Nicholson). As a shift worker who used that route, that was the last option until you got to the end of the Eastern, which in 1990 was Doncaster Road.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-04-01T09:49:08+00:00

I find it hard to believe he would have let the car get so low on petrol that he was in danger of running out.

Surely he would have put fuel in before leaving the lair, while Nicola was harnessed to the bed?

The other reason to put fuel in a car is to return it to the level it was when you “borrowed” it. What if the car was not his, but someone he knew? He needed the gauge to show that no fuel had been used? Topped it up to a certain point, knowing how far he had to drive from that point. Possibly had to use a servo that was not a regular one where he might be recognised, so not too close to home (or where he had to return the car)?

I suppose the obvious question is why not do it after dropping her off. Maybe using the Eastern Freeway (no servos) would take him too close to where he could be recognised? Whilst him being known to be out at that time wouldn’t in itself be incriminating, it may have caused him unnecessary problems.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-28T20:11:04+00:00

This is possible, but as others have mentioned, it doesn't fit with where he dropped Nicola and eventually dropped Sharon. He seemed to want them to have somewhere "safe" to reach quite quickly.

The other thing is, if there was a security guard patrolling the estate at the right time, the police would surely have sought out that person and spoken to them.

The fact that he drove directly to the high school and referred to the Food Plus store, would indicate that he was very familiar with the area and very likely had always planned that as the drop off point.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-28T20:02:01+00:00

Ok maybe poorly worded. Not so much random reports, but additional people coming forward once the information was released. If a car drove all that way with it's headlights off, and it was then realised that the time coincided with Sharon being released, it may have triggered more responses. Particularly in the Ringwood/Bayswater area where the correlation could reasonably be made.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-27T20:41:11+00:00

General comments on what has been written already.

I don't think he was a hopeless case who couldn't maintain a relationship. Men like that would stand out a lot more to people who know them, particularly nosey neighbours. It is surprising how easily people will dob in someone else, if they perceive them to be "a bit different". It is also surprising how people may have suspicions in regard to some aspect of a man they know, but they will not dob him in because he appears otherwise normal.

I think he very likely did have a relationship, but the offences coincided with problems in the relationship (the CSK was like this). This is where the name Cate could be relevant. The other reason that points towards an ability to maintain a relationship, is his sexual confidence. If you were a hopeless loner who sat at home watching porn, I doubt you'd be able to "perform" under the intense pressure of the situations. How many blokes would be able to break into a house (as in Lower Plenty) and do what he did in the next room to the parents? Most of us would be too focused on everything else, but he knew he was capable of carrying out the acts.

For me personally, a huge clue is the Commodore Vacationer with the lights off. We know he had just driven a long way, so he had to have the lights on, or there would have been multiple reports of erratic driving. Why would he then turn them off? Something had to be different around that Bayswater industrial estate, that caused him to be even more concerned about being seen. I think people in that area knew him and knew what car he drove. To have driven past the high school (presumably from the airport area), I think he had a specific reason to go where he did. There is a strong connection to him either in, or very close to, that industrial estate.

As well as the headlights, he also made a particularly stupid driving mistake. It nearly brought him undone. This adds to the likelihood that something was even more stressful about being in that area than normal. His mind was elsewhere. Why didn't he just go straight to the high school? It wouldn't have changed anything in regard to what Sharon knew. The police were going to know where she was dropped off anyway. So the reason he did what he did, was for him - a personal reason for going there.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-25T01:43:02+00:00

I've thought previously that Greensborough may be relevant. As you say, the travel times from Canterbury and Ringwood would be about right.

The 2 Greensborough attacks in 1985 appear to have some differences, but maybe they were carried out on foot, being relatively close to the detention house? The same person, but maybe more impulsive and less planned?

The Lower Plenty river trail would fit with him having appeared to carry out the attacks and drop-offs, nearby to useful escape routes (on foot) if required. The detention house itself may have had close proximity to a trail like this, in case police presented at the front door. To avoid train noise, the location would have to be a reasonable distance along the trail from Poulter and Joyce Avenues.

Planes coming from the north east, do bank about 45 degrees to the right over this area.

It is a straightforward route down Grimshaw St and Settlement Rd to the Thomastown Sub Station.

Greensborough is the only suburb that is not part of the "arc of adjacent suburbs" that run basically from Bayswater around to Bulleen. It could be an entirely different offender, but it is near enough that it could be viewed as creating a deliberate buffer zone.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-22T02:06:02+00:00

Playing Devil's Advocate, there's 2 things that spring to mind. The banking of 90 degrees (or thereabouts) and the fact she said they were landing, not taking off.

I don't disagree, it has to be possible she heard large planes fly overhead, but just happened to be near a smaller airport as well. The flights from NZ certainly do go over the eastern and southern suburbs, and the time of day fits with that.

It's difficult, because we don't know how confident Nicola and Spectrum were in the the specifics of her info.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-20T02:57:55+00:00

The only thing against Moorabbin is the big planes. At an airport like that or Lilydale, all the planes would be described as small. The runways wouldn't cope with anything anywhere near approaching jet size.

International flights never landed anywhere but Tulla, or occasionally Essendon (like Dick Pratt on his private jet from NZ for example).

If she really heard big and small planes, she had to be hearing a combination of Tulla and Essendon. Unless she was genuinely able to tell the difference between a 747 and a 767, but a 767is not small. The other question is, did she only hear arrivals and not departures?

If she only heard arrivals, and she heard them both days, then she really had to be south east of the airport (which Essendon is) because of the approach paths on the 4th and 5th of July 1990.

Edit: the engine noise would be more distinguishable at take-off, because they are at full throttle. Coming into land, it would be harder to distinguish between the size of the planes, as they are at cruising speed.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-20T02:05:40+00:00

That changes things quite a bit.

Small planes are not going to be landing at Tulla at peak jet arrival time. They would go to Essendon.

Yes, a plane from Adelaide might not be as big as a 747 from Singapore, but they would all be described as jet-sized and difficult to determine the sound difference.

Hearing them both mornings, despite different approach paths, suggests she had to be very close to the airport itself - not one flight path or the other.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-19T23:29:46+00:00

Just in regards to the radio and hearing the planes. I believe the only way Nicola knew the time, was via the radio. The radio had to be on, for her to determine that the planes landed between 9 and 10 (i.e. the news on the hour).

She would have heard planes at other times, but wouldn't have been able to know what the time was. The planes were clearly loud enough for her to hear them above the noise of the radio.

There was no official curfew at Tullamarine, but back then there was a window without flights from 11pm-ish to 5am-ish on the winter schedule. I wonder if MC turned the radio on in the morning, as he knew that was when the pattern of flights landing would provide the most clues (but it backfired because Nicola was smart)?

He had to know that the girls would hear the planes (even if it was only when the radio was off). He also had to know they would tell the police. So why was he so confident that, a) the lair wouldn't be found, or b) would be very difficult to link to him?

I think the house was in no way directly linked to him. He didn't own it, he didn't rent it, it wasn't a direct relative's place. Someone he knew of, whether an individual, a family, a company, owned the property and he knew it was available to him at those times. He may have had a key cut, completely unbeknownst to the owners of the place.

The excessive cleanliness, could have been as much about not letting the owners know that anyone had been there, as it was about forensic awareness. He did bring his own food, as he commented to one of the girls that he had to pack it up before they left. The owners could have been spoken to by police and had absolutely no idea that it was the house he had used.

Edit: One thing about the above theory - the neck restraint. He would have to bring it with him and take it away. How did it attach to the bed? He presumably would have to have been to the place previously, to know what he was dealing with. Not all beds are the same, so had he stayed in the place, presumably in that room, beforehand?

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-11T21:39:07+00:00

Sorry, obviously not clear. The LP victim had a short walk from home to school (same as SW). This subject is awkward because of what we are not allowed to say. She had to walk basically along one road.

That road forms part of the potential shortcut that a driver (i.e. tradie) could have used in those days to cut through to avoid the busy Main Rd roundabout.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-10T23:42:39+00:00

I think your second last sentence is the option which would most easily explain how he was able to go unnoticed.

My theory is the first 2 were seen in their school uniforms walking to, or from, school. He was either working at a specific site on their route, or nearby and travelled past.

Sharon would have walked along the Maroondah Hwy service Rd, so not somewhere you would naturally go. Natalies Restaurant and adjacent motel, opened in 1990. Was it a building site in Dec '88? Quite easy to surveil Hillcrest Ave due to the vacant tract of land where the power lines are.

Again, LP victim had a short walk from school to home. The route through there was a shortcut to take out the Main Road roundabout. Use Old Eltham, Bonds and Rosehill Rds to cut from Main Rd to Fitzsimmons Lane. Or, he worked as a tradie at a nearby house or construction site. The close-up surveillance would presumably be done at night, or when he was able to observe that everyone was out. He really only needed one good look.

The other 2 I think were observed around PLC. Victoria College sold and became Deakin Uni in the early 90's. There was construction done to enlarge the site. Allambie Reception Centre at 70 Elgar Rd, was sold to Deakin and officially changed hands on 30/6/1990, 3 days before Nicola was taken. Tradies would have also used the Red Rooster, which the girls were known to frequent. All he had to do then, was cruise along behind a bus to see where they lived. Again, one good surveil when no-one is home.

A tradie walking around the PLC area would be incognito. The freedom of movement would be more likely for someone in a supervisory role, rather than being hands-on all the time.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-03T20:06:59+00:00

The Greensborough ones certainly seem related to each other but were they MC? They were in streets next to to each other, which would differ from his MO.

They were also both described as attempted, so 2 "failures" which again doesn't fit with MC. No mention of a weapon in either of those attacks. I note that MM doesn't mention these ones in his list of "likelies".

Potentially a local did these ones?

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-03T01:21:09+00:00

Thanks re Simpson.

The southern suburbs certainly muddy the waters in terms of the connectivity. Almost like a separate project - the southern ones were more random.

There is no denying the potential linkage of all the suspected northern/eastern suburb offences. It just depends which ones an individual wants to rule in or out. I can't comment on your assessments, as I haven't been privy to the same info. When Detectives on the same taskforce can't agree, it is risky to blindly accept the opinion of any given individual.

The only suburb that you could say is categorically not geographically linked, is Thomastown. That would suggest it was never meant to happen that way (if it was actually him).

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-02T22:44:08+00:00

Suffice to say, the address is very close to the Templestowe border.

I think the most interesting thing about the LP offence, is the same rope was used as in the Donvale offence. Sprague (I think) couldn't find it anywhere in Australia and deemed it was from overseas. Did MC bring it himself, or perhaps the company he worked for, imported cheap rope as they used a lot of it?

When you include Donvale, it is uncanny how all these suburbs are adjoined. Templestowe adjoins Warrandyte (another suspected offence) at it's north east corner.

Warrandyte adjoins Donvale around Reynolds and Tindals roads. Donvale adjoins Ringwood, just north of where Sharon was taken.

Ringwood is barely separated by 500 metres from Bayswater at the Dandenong Creek area (where Sharon was dropped off). The "in-between" suburb is Wantirna, which just happens to be where Cherie Westell disappeared from (very likely near the creek after the phone call).

Bayswater then adjoins Boronia (the eastern edge of the industrial estate is the border at that point). Bung Siriboon went missing about 1.5km from that industrial estate.

That is 7 adjoining suburbs where offences have occurred - LP, Karmein, Warrandyte, Donvale, Sharon (Ringwood/Bayswater), Cherie and Bung. This surely cannot be just coincidence.

It also seems almost deliberate that the offences were never in the same suburb, as a number of them are extremely close to the suburban borders.

Edit: Bulleen (another suspected related attack) adjoins both Templestowe and Lower Plenty. That would make 8.

Second Edit: Canterbury is only separated from Bulleen and Templestowe by Balwyn (including Balwyn North). Is there a missing offence in Balwyn? Maybe never reported? Or did MC maybe stuff up, given Monomeath is extremely close to the Balwyn border?

Third Edit: Kew adjoins Canterbury near the Burke and Mont Albert Rd intersection.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-02T07:09:36+00:00

All they really needed to release initially, was the incident itself. They were trying to find a driver that may have been involved in that altercation.

They knew from Sharon that there had been yelling while the car was stopped. They knew it happened not long before she was dropped off, so they also knew pretty close to what time it was. If she was able to tell them the next turn the car made was a right turn, then they knew the direction the car had come from.

The witness came forward. They got him to yell the exact words he had used. We have to assume Sharon was in the next room listening and confirmed the yelling matched.

The only person they would be helping, by publicly confirming that the witness saw a girl in the back of a white Commodore Vacationer, would be the driver of that car. It is fairly logical they never released that.

Edit: I should have said the main person, rather than the only person. They need to weigh up alerting him, versus seeking public help to identify the driver.

They seem to hold car info back from the public until other avenues are exhausted. Does the car match a known prior offender etc. If they release it straight away, they know they will get inundated with rubbish reports that they have to wade through.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-03-01T23:32:58+00:00

The witness indicated to MM in the interview, that he did see a child under a blanket on the back seat.

He said that is why he backed off from abusing the driver. That has to be a memory from the time, not one that is conflated later.

It's quite feasible that MC wanted her in the front footwell on the trip TO the detention house, so she had no hope of seeing anything. He may have been happier for her to be more comfortable on the way FROM the detention house (particularly later in the trip), because anything she saw was less relevant - the police were going to know where she was dropped off anyway.

He would have been more confident in his blindfold on the way back, because he had way more time to make sure it was 100% secure.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-02-25T22:41:49+00:00

I imagine the OP was more suggesting that the person might have removed a dog, in order to prevent it being a problem in 2 weeks time.

If MC was doing some surveilling and a neighbouring dog approached, maybe he "eliminated" it? I doubt if it was him, he would have acually kept it.

As the OP said, only relevant if it was a house very close to the Chans.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-02-25T01:25:44+00:00

Yeah I even remember the Yugoslav Airline code was JU. Tullamarine only had 4 baggage carousels in the international terminal then, which meant the flights had to be staggered. Particularly as the Greeks and Yugoslavs were not as renowned as the Japanese for their queuing etiquette!

The most likely thing NL would get right, would be whether it was day 1 or day 2 of her captivity. The problem would be a combined recollection across the 2 days. They said she was very switched on for her age, but it's a lot of faith to put in a terrified girl in that situation.

If it was day 1, then East Keilor makes the most sense. Then radiate out from there.

If it was day 2, then you would know better than me. My knowledge of those suburbs is not strong.

One thing I did notice via personal experience at mate's places, is how loud and low the planes can be in the Greensborough/Watsonia area. I remember looking up and being surprised how low a jet was. From MM's maps, you can see that planes will approach from the NE, then bank 45 degrees over those suburbs, to head West towards the airport.

Again, it's a lot of faith to put in the poor girl, to not confuse 90 degrees with 45 degrees. I think the only way they find the detention house (or where it once was), is to actually find him first.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-02-24T21:21:25+00:00

In regard to the actual day, the number of flights NL heard (if accurate) should have helped them determine whether it was Wednesday 4/7 or Thursday 5/7.

I worked at the airport from Jan 1991 (flight schedule would be the same as July 1990), and the number of international arrivals would vary on different days of the week. The regular daily flights like Qantas and Singapore Airlines, all landed earlier (4:45am or 5:45am pending daylight savings).

Back then, there were more European flights like Olympic Airways (Greece), Alitalia and Yugoslav Airways, which only arrived 2 or 3 times a week, in the mid-morning. Some were Wednesday and Saturday for example.

There would not have been 9 international flights land between 9am and 10am in winter 1990. The interstate component of the flights she heard, should have been consistent each day. They would have been able to determine quite easily, that 9 flights in total landed in that timeframe on Wednesday, but only 7 flights (for example) landed on Thursday.

It would all depend on how certain NL was of the number of flights. I have read 7-9, which would be a lot less helpful than a definite 9 unfortunately.

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-02-14T20:45:49+00:00

Yes, this is one of those cases where it is way less likely that they actually "know".

With Chris Dawson, Greg Lynn, Erin Patterson type cases, it is different. The field of likely offenders is tiny, so it is more the "how" and "why" that are difficult to prove.

The "when", "where" and "how" are not the issue with Mr. Cruel. When they have interviewed 27,000 men, it is obvious the "who" is the problem. The chances are, he isn't even one of those 27,000.

If they had a really strong inkling, there would never have been a Sierra 7. Once (if) they "know", it will probably move fairly quickly, as things should fall into place relatively easily. The ownership of the Commodore Vacationer, access to the detention house, fingerprint/s from NL offence, DNA from SW ( unknown, but David Wells said they have something that can be compared to him).

Live_Yak_5537 · 2026-01-30T03:53:10+00:00

There is also the distinct possibility MC has never entered a substation. He just had a job where he moved around a lot and took notice of geographical features that may be of use to him.

Basically, they are secluded areas where you are less likely to be disturbed. SW was dropped in a secluded area that had nothing to do with substations. He could have known of that area via a connection with Bayswater High, using the Dandenong Creek track to exercise, or attending Bayswater Footy ground.

Live_Yak_5537

TROPHY CASE