Violent and Graphic video footage of couple being bashed in Melbourne karaoke bar released

The young thugs in this video must be found quickly. If you know who they are, and more importantly where they might be, contact police immediately or ring crime stoppers .We do not want them on our streets or on a night out our kids might be at. Disgraceful behaviour

Reporting crime or hoon behaviour
If you have any information regarding a crime, criminal activity, or hoon behaviour you can contact Crime Stoppers Victoria online or by calling on 1800 333 000 and confidentially report what you know.

Mon 19 Jan 2015, 3:38pm

Video footage of a man and woman being bashed in a vicious attack at a Melbourne karaoke bar has been released.

The couple in their 20s were drinking at the Elizabeth Street bar early on January 11 when they were assaulted.

Footage of the attack shows a 25-year-old man being punched and stomped on by a group of men until he was unconcious on the floor.

The man’s girlfriend can be seen trying to protect him on the ground.

A man is then seen to grab her by the hair and throw her to the floor, before she is punched and kicked by the group.

Shortly before the brawl, the couple was sitting at a table with their attackers.

Detective Senior Constable Matt Folvig said it was unclear what started it, but words were exchanged beforehand.

“Apparently they’ve just said something that was disagreed with and they’ve just turned on the pair,” he said.

Police released images and CCTV footage in the hope of identifying the people involved.

Anyone with information is urged to contact Crime Stoppers.

Who wants to be a unpaid crime blog reporter/contributer?

Not real journo’s who still have a job, maybe cadets (but not good for resume…mmm)

Maybe old school scribes who wish they could stay in the game!

How about folks like me with no relevant qualifications but gives a toss about the crimes in their communities?

The pay-off is a verdict like today GBC cowardly wife killer.

People like me? You relate to how I write?

Hey cant spell well, 2 finger typer…So am I YES…Our stuff gets checked before we post.

Sounds like you?

GOOD keep reading

This site has had massive coverage lately (I cover non famous crimes too)

I’m thinking along the lines of a Co-ordinator in each state

That co-ordinator runs that states crimes and has authors who get the stories up.

What do you think?

Sound good, bad, troublesome, confusing?

All I want is to give the best coverage of what is going on in our communities.

The community expectations has/have?  outgrown my skills honestly…

Each state, minimum deserves better coverage. The good people email me why haven’t you covered this rape, or that kidnapping, or the death of a cousin in my indigenous community.

You could help us!

Is it the end for sites like Aussiecriminals

I have to ask that question after being harassed by the legal folks at the Courier Mail demanding I take down all the articles and photographs that I use here, at this point about GBC trial. (I had already removed the pics over last 4 days)

Articles and photographs are owned by them and I am stealing basically so we can dissect and discuss this case and others. They say I can post links only to their site?????

I am sure there are millions of pages from newspapers published in another format or whatever on people’s blogs for non commercial reasons.

But they have come after me. Interesting that…

Here is the email I received this afternoon, I have 1 day to reply. What do we do? I am devastated at the moment but wanted to share it with you guys.

Dear Rob,

Thank you for your email explaining your situation.  I am sorry to hear about your injury.  However, it is good that you have found something that you are clearly passionate about, and a community of people with similar interests.

As I am sure you will appreciate, the Courier Mail team is equally passionate about what we do.  We have dedicated court reporters who cover criminal trials day in, day out under enormous pressure to write stories accurately and quickly.  We also have photographers who travel extensively, editors working into the night and lawyers like myself who ensure our coverage is not defamatory or in contempt of court.  So you can imagine our team’s disappointment when our hard work is taken by other people and copied.

Your website is infringing our copyright in our articles and photographs.  Just because we publish our work on the internet does not mean everyone can take it and use it as their own.  Attributing the material as being sourced from the Courier Mail does not provide an excuse – it only proves that you have taken the material illegally.    As your website is about people who break the law, I am sure you can see the irony.

We ask that you take down the Courier Mail articles and photographs from your website.  You can, of course, replace them with links to our website at

Please let me know whether you agree by tomorrow.  I have copied this email to your website host, WordPress/Automattic (for the attention of David W.), to keep them informed.

Kind regards,

*********** | Legal Counsel  | News Corp Australia

Level 3, 2 Holt Street, Surry Hills NSW 2010
Direct  *************  Mobile ********  Email *****************

—–Original Message—–
From: Robbo []
Sent: Tuesday, 17 June 2014 1:23 AM
To: ********************
Subject: Re DMCA notice

Hi *************

I am writing to you for 2 reasons.One is for understanding the other is what can we do as a community of crime lovers do so this does not happen again.

I started  this website called about 4 years ago because as a community we never got to have a say about crimes happening in our community.

I am a one man show unpaid normal guy. After falling off a roof at work and recovering I found something to o.Talk about crime.That is all we do.We are non commercial all we do is talk about cases.

How else can we discuss cases when the newspapers/media are the only ones we get info from. I only share stuff on the net and try to give credit to the sources like yourselves.

Your actions would devastate hundreds if not thousands of folks in our community who were touched by the baden clay case.

I sincerely ask in the first instance you remove the threat to our site and then we can discuss what to do about it.

This site has been my only outlet since injuring my back.



Harley Hicks-baby killer gets life


 LEGAL Aid has funded an ­attempt to cut the 32-year jail sentence of baby killer Harley Hicks so he doesn’t feel ­“utterly helpless”.

Hicks beat 10-month-old Zayden Veal-Whitting to death in his cot with a copper-wire baton while high on ice during a June 2012 burglary.

He will learn on Wednesday at the Victorian Court of Appeal, sitting in Bendigo, if his bid is successful.


His lawyers claimed his jail term was “manifestly excessive”, saying his crime was not as heinous as other child killings as it was not premeditated, nor an act of revenge.

Zayden’s grieving mum, Casey Veal, slammed the decision to fund Hicks’ appeal as a “waste of taxpayers’ money”, saying it could be far better used on deserving Victorians.

Harley Hicks at Bendigo court.

Harley Hicks at court in Bendigo.

“They said in court he (Hicks) will be in his 50s when he gets out. My son never saw his first birthday. He’ll never have the chance to have a girlfriend or get married,” she said.

She is raising cash for a playground in Zayden’s memory.

Victorian Legal Aid’s funding of the appeal comes on top of tens of thousands of dollars used on legal fees at Hicks’ trial.

A Legal Aid spokesman said the body was prohibited from revealing information about anybody who had applied for funding, but it was the job of the organisation to “fund the representation of people charged with serious crimes and to make sure they are fairly treated by the justice system and our decisions must be made objectively”.

New changes to the appeals process come into effect in early March following a review published late last year.

“There will be tighter rules on appeals which go straight to hearing stage and appeals which claim that the sentence is manifestly excessive as the main reason,” he said.

But he said the changes weren’t backdated, and there would still be some appeals that had funding approved in 2014 that would be heard by the Court this year.

A spokeswoman for Victorian Attorney-General Martin Pakula acknowledged Legal Aid had promised to implement tighter scrutiny on funding for criminal appeals.

“We look forward to the VLA’s assessment of those new guidelines after they are implemented in March,” she said.

On Tuesday, Hicks was compared to child-murderers Arthur Freeman and Robert Farquharson in a bid to reduce his 32-year jail term.

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Kaye described Hicks’ actions as “totally and utterly evil” in handing down the non-parole period after a jury found the 21-year-old guilty of murder in April last year.

Casey Veal, the mother of slain Bendigo baby Zayden.

Casey Veal, the mother of slain Bendigo baby Zayden.

But barrister David Hallowes, acting for Hicks, told the Court of Appeal in Bendigo on Tuesday morning his client’s sentence should be reduced because of his age, his traumatic upbringing, and because the killing was “spontaneous and impulsive” rather than planned.

He also said there was an “absence of features of vengeance and premeditation that attend the comparable cases where children are victims of murder”.

Mr Hallowes said Freeman, who threw his daughter over the West Gate Bridge, and Farquharson, who drove his sons into a dam, had committed more heinous acts because they had planned acts of revenge.

“We say that is worse,” he said.

Both men, who were far older than Hicks when sentenced, were given similar sentences to the younger criminal for their acts.

But barrister Susan Borg, for the DPP, said Hicks’ actions were worse because it was a “cold, calculated killing of a baby for no apparent reason”.

Ms Borg said Hicks, who was absent from the courtroom, used a homemade baton to strike Zayden 33 times while the infant lay in his cot.

“When he is confronted with a child that is no threat to him at all, he used it on that child. Not once, not twice, but 33 times,” she said.

Zayden’s mother is traumatised by the grisly discovery of her battered and bloodied child under a blanket on the morning of June 15, 2012.

Hicks pleaded not guilty the murder and claimed he was never in the house.

Harley Hicks at Bendigo Court in 2014.

Harley Hicks outside the court in 2014.

Ms Veal sat calmly with family and friends towards the back of the packed courtroom on Tuesday.

His mother and brothers, including twin Ashley Hicks, sat in court behind Mr Hallowes during the Bendigo hearing.

Mr Hallowes also claimed that Justice Kaye aggravated the sentence upon finding there had been an absence of remorse.

During his sentencing remarks Justice Kaye said: “During the trial I took the opportunity to observe you in the dock. At no stage of the trial could I detect from you any sign of remorse.”

Mr Hallowes argued Hicks’ demeanour had never been raised during the plea hearing.

“Had it been raised, there may have been appropriate explanations given for the various affects over the course of the trial.

For example, evidence was put on the plea that the applicant was taking various forms of psychiatric medication during the case,” he said.

Hicks will be at least 52 by the time he is eligible for release.

A judgment will be handed down at 10am Wednesday.

Harley Hicks trial: day by day

GALLERY: The Harley Hicks trial

Sentence will never end family’s pain: A look back and the trial and what couldn’t be told

10am: JUSTICE Stephen Kaye has begun addressing the Supreme Court as he prepares to deliver his sentence for baby killer Harley Hicks.

10.12am: Justice Kaye said what Hicks did in Zayden’s room when he killed him with considerable violence was clear ‘but what is unclear is why you did it’.

10.16am: Justice Kaye said the full account of the injuries to Zayden was harrowing to say the least.

He said he could only imagine the heartbreak of Zayden’s mother, Casey Veal, and those who loved Zayden.

10.18am: Justice Kaye said Hicks struck the fatal blows because he ‘specifically intended to kill him’.

10.23am: Justice Kaye said Hicks put up an innocent man as a false killer ‘in order to save your skin’.

10.24am: ‘Your offending places this case in the worst cases of murder that come before this court. The life of a baby is particularly special and precious. What you did was totally and utterly evil,’ Justice Kaye said.

10.28am: Justice Kaye said ‘You have shown no remorse for what you have done’.

10.33am: Justice Kaye said ‘At no stage of the trial could I detect from you any sign of remorse’.

Justice Kaye said he observed Hicks during the trial and he showed no indication of any pity for the baby or the family.

10.37am: Justice Kaye says of particular concern was Hicks’ criminal history and escalating violence.

‘There are other victims of your crime who have suffered and continue to suffer,’ Justice Kaye said.

10.40am: The English language is ‘entirely inadequate’ to describe their grief and anguish, Justice Kaye said.

10.41am: Justice Kaye quotes Zayden’s mother’s victim impact statement that says, ‘I miss Zayden each second of each day. Words cannot describe the pain I feel for both my sons.

‘I am serving a life sentence .. all I have is memories and most of them are tainted by this crime.’

Justice Kaye quotes father James Whitting’s impact statement:

‘The tragic and needless loss of my son Zayden devastated us all. I don’t even know where to begin to express the pain in my heart.’

10.43am: Justice Kaye says he quoted the statements to show the ‘indescribable grief and pain as a direct consequence of the crime’.

10.46am: Justice Kaye said Hicks used alcohol and drugs from a young age and methyl amphetamine on a regular basis since 2011.

10.48am: Justice Kaye says Hicks did not always comply with conditions ordering him to get help for his addictions.

10.51am: Justice Kaye said Hicks did not have a psychiatric disorder but his personal history showed he suffered behavioural disorders from an early age, compounded by his family life, sexual abuse and long standing abuse of alcohol and drugs.

10.52am: Justice Kaye says Hicks shows poor prospects for rehabilitation.

10.53am: ‘You are a danger to the community. Especially to the defenceless and vulnerable members of it’, Justice Kaye says.

10.54am: ‘There’s a real need to protect the community from you’, Justice Kaye says.

10.56am: ‘All human life is sacrosanct but the community places special value on the innocent and the lives who are young and vulnerable,’ Justice Kaye says.

11am:  ‘The primary victim of your crime was a helpless defenceless infant,’ but Justice Kaye says he must consider Hicks’ age.

11.01am: Harley Hicks sentenced to life in prison.

11.02am: Harley Hicks sentenced to life in prison with a minimum non-parole period of 32 years.

11.06am: Hicks has been removed from court.

File picture: Harley Hicks.

File picture: Harley Hicks.

Justice Kaye said Hicks ‘unleashed a ferocious attack on Zayden’ that night and the prosecution’s case was very powerful.

Extra security is in place outside the Bendigo court ahead of Harley Hicks' sentencing today. Picture: GLENN DANIELS

Extra security is in place outside the Bendigo court ahead of Harley Hicks’ sentencing today. Picture: GLENN DANIELS

Extra security is in place outside the Bendigo court ahead of Harley Hicks’ sentence today.

Hicks, 21, of Long Gully, was found guilty by a Supreme Court jury in April of murdering Bendigo baby Zayden Veal-Whitting.

Hicks was out committing a series of burglaries overnight on June 14/15, 2012, when he entered Zayden’s Eaglehawk Road home and bludgeoned the 10-month-old to death with a home-made baton.

More to come.

He was just a baby. A tiny, perfect little baby.

A baby growing too quickly into a little boy… but a little boy who was never given the chance to become one.

A little boy who had never celebrated a birthday. Never played in mud puddles or raced to the gate to greet his mum or dad after work.

Harley Hicks taken from court after the jury convicted him of murder in April.Harley Hicks taken from court after the jury convicted him of murder in April.

Read all about the the trial at the Bendigo Advertiser

He had taken his first few steps, but never run his first race. He hadn’t had much time to wrestle his brother, choose a favourite football team or line his parents’ walls with art.

He barely had time to live.

Zayden Veal

Zayden Veal Photo: Supplied

Because on one horrific night in June 2012, a monster entered his home and bludgeoned him to death.

The helpless, beautiful little boy was struck 25 times to the face and at least eight times to the head with a blunt instrument as he lay in his cot. The baby monitor was turned off in the minutes before or after the killing, and his blankets were placed up to his nose before his killer left him to die. He could have already been dead.

Weeks later, that instrument was found to be a home-made baton made of copper wire and electrical tape – and it was covered in the little boy’s DNA.

It was also covered in DNA that matched his killer.

Almost two years after 10-month-old Zayden Veal-Whitting was killed, Harley Hicks will this week be sentenced for his murder.

He is yet to tell the court why he stole the life of a helpless baby – and has shown no remorse for the brutal killing.

On the morning of June 15, 2012, Bendigo woke to a tragedy beyond comprehension.

What started as a report to police of a burglary at an Eaglehawk Road home was quickly followed by a desperate call to paramedics to help revive a child.  As investigators were called to the scene, tongues were already wagging and finding reasons to place blame. But blame in all the wrong areas.

Casey Veal had just found her beautiful little boy beaten to death in his cot. Her then partner Mathew Tisell heard her chilling scream and ran to help.

As Zayden was taken to hospital, police tape was put around his home on Eaglehawk Road. It became a crime scene.

Zayden’s father received a call to go to the hospital. He had no idea why, but the house where Zayden was staying with his mother and then stepfather was on the way. James and his mother Anne drove past the police tape. They had no idea what had taken place. No one did.

It was at the hospital James was told by a social worker she was sorry for the loss of his son. He was lost. Shattered. Confused. James still didn’t know what had happened, or which son had died.

Casey didn’t have the answers, other than what she had woken to find their baby bruised and limp.

Her house had been burgled and their son had been killed.

James knew neither Casey nor Matt were responsible for the death – but who was?

The microscope was on anyone who had any association with the Eaglehawk Road home.

But as the family came together in the hospital to learn the shocking and heartbreaking news, police started receiving reports of a number of burglaries in the Long Gully area on the night of Zayden’s death.

More reports would follow in the next few days.

There were similarities at many, including the burglary at Eaglehawk Road.

That was when police turned their attention to known offenders in the area – and their intelligence turned them to Green Street – the home of Harley Hicks.

An initial warrant allowed police to search for stolen goods by known thieves living at the address on June 17.

They were looking for goods stolen from properties throughout Bendigo and Long Gully on June 14/15.

Even the most experienced investigators were confronted by the filth they saw during that search.

But among the rubbish they found a set top box stolen from a property across the road from the Eaglehawk Road home where Zayden was killed, which put one of the occupants of the house in the area at the time of the burglaries and the death.

Each of the occupants was interviewed, but Hicks had already fled Bendigo, leaving for Gisborne the day after Zayden’s murder, a day earlier than planned.

The Victoria Police Homicide Squad believed Hicks was ‘merely a person of interest’ because he was a known burglar and stolen goods were found at his address, so they set about finding him.

Hicks was in Gisborne with his then-girlfriend Martina at that stage – searching the burglaries and the baby’s death on the internet. He had also cut up his tracksuit.

When Martina told him she had received a phone call to say the police were looking for him, Hicks fled. He spent the night at the Gisborne football oval, before phoning his father John Hicks the following day.

Police received information to say John was travelling to Gisborne to collect his son and return to Bendigo on June 19, so detectives set up an intercept at Big Hill.

It was there that Hicks was arrested, while hiding in the rear seat of his father’s car.

At that stage he was only a suspect for the burglary at Eaglehawk Road.

But it was from that moment, the pieces started coming together for investigators – and it was Hicks himself who gave it away.

He soon became a person of interest regarding the death of Zayden, but there was still nothing that put him in the house.

From the minute he was arrested on the Calder Highway, Hicks immediately put up a false killer. He started shooting off at the mouth, telling police from the outset he was with another man on the night of the burglaries. Naming an innocent man as being with him that night.

Over three days, Hicks told the story of being out that night with that man and parting ways when they got to Eaglehawk Road.

That man was arrested on June 19, but there was a problem with Hicks’ story. He had an iron-clad alibi. He was never out that night with Harley Hicks. He did not commit any burglaries and did not kill Zayden.

That information led police to a second search of the Green Street address.

This time they found a wallet reported stolen by Mr Tisell in a car outside the home of the Hicks brothers, which the occupants used for ‘storage’ – and, they found a baton. It was still some time before that baton was connected to the killing.

Throughout the trial, Hicks’ brothers tried to say that instrument was used as a dog’s chew toy, but there was no evidence a dog had been anywhere near it. Martina, however, had seen that baton hidden behind a picture frame. It was the murder weapon.

Hicks was not questioned over the murder, but on the morning of June 21, he offered a plea of guilty without admission to a series of thefts, burglaries and attempted burglaries overnight on June 14 and 15 – 11 matters in total, but excluding that at Eaglehawk Road.

He also pleaded guilty to 10 other offences relating to thefts and burglaries committed prior to that night.

Hicks was sentenced to 12 months’ youth detention.

Those pleas were excluded from the Supreme Court murder trial because Hicks’ defence successfully argued it would be unfair to have them admitted in circumstances where he pleaded guilty to avoid being remanded in custody in an adult prison.

Hicks told his legal team he didn’t want to go adult prison because of an allegation of sexual assault he had previously made against an inmate at Port Phillip Prison. He wanted the matter finalised that day so he would more than likely go into youth detention.

Hicks admitted an attempted burglary at 23 Duncan Street, a burglary at 30 Wilson Street and the theft from a vehicle in Jackson Street, where the set top box was stolen, but denied any involvement with the other offences that night at Dillon, Bray and Bolt streets and Havilah Road. His defence team said he pleaded guilty to all matters, knowing that if the matter was adjourned he would be remanded in adult custody because of outstanding matters before the court.

Hicks’ defence lawyer David Hallowes further submitted that if the pleas of guilty were admitted in the trial, his lawyer would need to be called as a witness and that would reveal that Hicks had previously spent time in an adult jail, which would be prejudicial to his client.

Crown prosecutor Michele Williams SC argued Hicks knew what he was doing and did not dispute or deny any of the allegations in the police summary. She said Hicks was familiar with the legal system having had previous court appearances in other criminal matters and was looking after his own interests.

In ruling against allowing the pleas of guilty to all matters during the murder trial, Justice Stephen Kaye said the decision was not clear cut as Hicks knew precisely the charges brought against him and there was no evidence of any misconception or misunderstanding.

But he said Hicks was a young man with a pressing reason for not wanting to return to adult custody and based on the admissions he had made during his interview with police, there was a strong likelihood he would have been given a custodial sentence.

Justice Kaye said Hicks’ lawyer at the time did not have sufficient information to properly advise her client as he had entered the guilty pleas so quickly after a three-day interview with police and the police brief had not been compiled.

He said there were significant questions as to the reliability of the pleas of guilty as truthful admissions by Hicks of his guilt and it seemed clear he pleaded guilty by way of expediency rather than because he admitted the allegations against him were true.

On June 21, 2012, Hicks was sent to a youth detention centre for the thefts and burglaries. But the investigation into the murder of a child continued.

Hicks by now was a suspect. He had put up lies about being with another man that night and a wallet belonging to Zayden’s then stepfather was found at Hicks’ address.

His three-day interview with police, and time spent in the holding cells with an undercover police operative, revealed information only the killer would know.

In the pre-trial arguments, Hicks’ defence team tried to have the record of interview excluded from the murder trial, but their request was denied.

Sitting in his office reviewing the evidence some weeks after Hicks was sent to youth detention, Detective Senior Constable Tony Harwood of the homicide squad compared baby Zayden’s injuries with a baton collected during a search of Green Street. It was sent for forensic tests. There was a match.

One end of the baton was covered in Zayden’s DNA – the other carried the DNA of Harley Hicks.

So too, did the stolen set top box – stolen from a property Hicks had admitted being at on the night of the killing.

On September 24, 2012, Harley Hicks appeared briefly in the Melbourne Magistrates Court charged with murder. He later entered a plea of not guilty.

When his first lie about a false killer didn’t work, Hicks turned to the DNA evidence as his defence.

The trouble with the DNA was that Hicks had an identical twin, and identical twins have identical DNA.

As that fact was told to the Supreme Court by a forensic officer, Harley winked at Detective Harwood from the dock. It was a glimpse of the cockiness shown during his record of interview with police.

But that argument only pointed further to his guilt.

Harley’s twin, Ashley Hicks, also had an alibi. Despite the defence team doing its best to ask the question as to just which twin killed the baby, Ashley’s alibi stacked up.

He was at home with his father that night. John Hicks supported his son’s story.

Ashley didn’t kill Zayden.

Harley Hicks did.

The court was told was that Hicks was out committing a series of burglaries overnight on June 14/15, 2012, when he entered 10-month-old Zayden’s home and killed him. No one knows why, but the prosecution put to the jury that it was possible the baby woke and Hicks needed to silence him to avoid being caught stealing from the house. He had ‘hit the jackpot’ Ms Williams said, finding almost $2000 in cash, and did not want to be detected.

Earlier in the night, Hicks told his brother Josh, Josh’s girlfriend Danielle and Martina he was heading out. Over his shoulder was a black bag. Josh said his brother always carried that shoulder bag. The same bag described by a couple who chased a man from their yard about midnight. The chase during which Hicks would lose his shoes.

Martina would later tell the court Hicks left twice that night, once to buy drugs, and later again.

The jury heard Hicks told police he was on the shard that night; crystal methamphetamine, known as ice.

But he said the man he was out with that night – the false killer he put up – had been using the methamphetamine ice and was “really, really aggressive … scary aggressive”.

The prosecution said Hicks was actually talking about himself.

But the jury couldn’t be told the extent of Hicks’ habit – and for how long he had been a drug user.

Hicks’ history includes years of repeated drug abuse, including cannabis, heroin, ecstasy, alcohol and ice.

Nor could the jury be told of his priors, which were escalating.

They knew Hicks was already on the run from police that night. Indeed, only three days earlier officers had gone to his home looking for him.

But the jury didn’t know Hicks had a long criminal history, which started at the age of 14, and included thefts, criminal damage, aggravated burglary and armed robbery.

The murder and series of burglaries and thefts were committed two months after Hicks was placed on a Community Corrections Order for armed robbery.

But on this night, Hicks was still stealing whatever he could from easily accessible places – glove boxes in unlocked cars, and houses.

The back door at Eaglehawk Road could not be locked.

But because his earlier pleas of guilty to those offences in the Magistrates Court, excluding the burglary at Eaglehawk Road, could not be admitted during the trial, Detective Harwood had to reinvestigate each one.

He needed fresh evidence during the Supreme Court trial – but led to a hiccup in proceedings.

The chase where he lost his shoes was pivotal. So too, were his movements afterwards – and just what was he wearing on his feet?

Martina reported Hicks was wearing a pair of motorcycle boots the day the pair left for Gisborne on June 15. She had never seen them before and they were far too big for him.

But the occupants at a house in Dillon Street burgled on June 14/15, 2012, knew the boots only too well, as they belonged to them.

But it wasn’t until a fresh statement was made by the Dillon Street occupants on March 13 this year that the boots were reported stolen that night. It was two weeks into the murder trial.

The prosecution then sought to have the boots admitted as evidence so the sole could be compared to a footprint on a couch in the rear yard of the Eaghlehawk Road home where Zayden was killed.

That new piece of evidence brought the trial to a standstill.

Sixteen prosecution witnesses had already been called and the trial was well-advanced.

A day was set aside for legal argument, during which the defence put to Justice Kaye that the evidence had come to light late in the trial and the prosecution had opened the case stating no link could be drawn between a mark on the couch, which had been pushed by the residents at the property against a fence, and the accused man.

Mr Hallowes said the prosecution had access to the boots before the trial and knew Hicks was wearing them from June 15 to 18.

He said had the boots been tendered as evidence earlier, the defence may have approached the case differently and cross-examined witnesses in another manner.

Justice Kaye agreed the evidence was produced late in the trial and whilst he accepted the statement from the Dillon Street resident might have prompted investigators to look at the link, there was sufficient evidence to draw the link beforehand.

In his ruling, Justice Kaye said it was “a pity this has come to pass’’.

“I am loathe, in a case like this, to shut out evidence of this type and I certainly do not wish to be critical but the fact is little new has emerged. The police had the boots in their possession, they had a cut out of the print, they had Martina Lawn’s evidence in relation to her understanding that the boots had been stolen that night and the matter was raised by Mr Hallowes at the committal. In addition, we had two weeks of pre-trial argument for the Crown to consider issues such as this. It is not my role to punish or criticise the prosecution, but in weighing up the fairness of excluding it, it is a factor that must be taken into account.

“Fundamentally,  my role is to ensure that the accused man receives a fair trial. In my view, as I have stated, there would be strong prejudice to the accused in the conduct of the trial if were to admit the evidence.

“No direction given by me could allay that prejudice before the jury. I am of the view that prejudice does outweigh any probative value of the evidence and so I have come to the inevitable conclusion that I must exclude it.’’

Few could argue Hicks wasn’t afforded a fair trial.

The law dictates all accused persons are entitled to the presumption of innocence – and that must be the starting point. It was up to the prosecution to prove Hicks guilty.

The ruling about the boots was made and the trial continued.

But at the same time, something changed.

In the early days of the five-week trial, Hicks took notes. Pages and pages of colour-coded scrawl. Some in red, other lines in blue. He seemed to be paying attention. But as the trial went into days and weeks, the notes slowly stopped. His attention was sporadic and on one occasion, he could be heard snoring in the dock. A break in proceedings was called before the jurors picked up on his nap – but there’s no doubt some would have noticed.

This jury was astute. The prosecution, defence and Justice Kaye spoke several times of the particularly careful and observant group that formed the jury.

A jury charged with the responsibility of a harrowing trial. A jury charged with taking everything in.

And they did.

They would have known each time Hicks started shaking – a shake of the leg that became louder and louder each time evidence linking him to the murder was put before the court. The shaking alone told a powerful story – he was nervous, and more so at certain times. They would have noticed.

And they certainly noticed the antics of Hicks’ supporters in court. The interaction between Hicks and his brother in the witness box, which attracted a caution. The note-taking by Hicks’ fiancee,  who followed witnesses from the courtroom – actions that came close to having her found in contempt of court.

They would not have known about the stern warning given by Justice Kaye to Hicks’ mum about posting photos of her son in the dock on Facebook – but that would have been the exception.

This jury didn’t miss a trick, and there were a few of them.

But importantly, they never lost a sense of why they were there – and that was to deliver a verdict in a trial involving the horrific, violent death of a baby.

They listened to, and considered, every piece of evidence. They questioned. They asked for breaks when everyone grew tired. It was exhausting.

But they also watched a family sitting in the courtroom in the hope of justice being served for their beautiful little boy. They were told to separate emotion and look at the facts, which they did. But there was no doubt they were well aware of the trust Zayden’s family put in them to do that properly.

Little Zayden’s family attended court every day. Their heads would fall every time a new piece of distressing evidence was put to the court, but their strength kept them there.

No one in court could ever properly express just how brave that family was.

The brave mother who told her story of finding her baby beaten to death in his cot.

The last time she saw her son alive was when she gave him a bottle and helped him re-settle. He had a cold and needed some medication.

The next day her little boy’s injuries brought the most hardened police and paramedics to tears.

A brave father and his partner who never got to hold their little boy and say goodbye. Who listened to every word said to defend their son’s killer.

A father who remembers a little boy who only a day before he died said the word dad for the first time.

Grandparents equally heartbroken and robbed of the love of a small child who was their world.

The pain of the trial ended for them when the jury delivered a guilty verdict. Today, Justice Kaye will hand down his sentence.

The legal process will be over. Hicks will be sentenced for his heinous crime.

But there will never, ever be justice for baby Zayden, or those who loved him.

This tragedy does not end with Zayden’s death. It does not end with a verdict, or a sentence. It will ever end for those he is survived by. Their pain will never, ever end.

The Harley Hicks trial – the case day by day


Supreme Court trial begins

A BENDIGO baby was struck at least 25 times to the head and killed with a home-made baton during a burglary at his Long Gully home, the Victorian Supreme Court has heard. Read full story here


Mother tells of moment she found her baby covered in blood

THE mother of a Bendigo baby bludgeoned to death in his cot has told the Supreme Court of the harrowing moment she found her son limp and covered in blood. Read full story here


Twin brother says he was at home on night of Bendigo baby murder

THE twin brother of accused man Harley Hicks says he was at home the night baby Zayden Veal-Whitting was killed and did not commit the murder. Read fully story here 

Mum’s partner says he ‘loved those boys’

THE partner of Casey Veal has told the Supreme Court he loved Ms Veal’s children and did not kill baby Zayden. Read full story here


I saw baton in Harley’s bedroom: Witness

THE older brother of Harley Hicks has told the court he saw a baton on the floor of the bedroom of the accused man several days after baby Zayden Veal-Whitting was found bludgeoned to death in his cot. Read full story here


Hicks trial hears of backyard intruder

Accused seen leaving house wearing grey hoodie and carrying bag. Witness tells of backyard intruder. Read full storyhere


Questions raised about twin’s alibi

QUESTIONS have been raised about the alibi of the twin brother of the man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting on the night of the child’s death. Read full story here 


Hicks trial: Twin brother was home that night, court hears

THE twin brother of the man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting was at home on the night of the child’s death, the father of Harley and Ashley Hicks has told the Supreme Court. Read full story here

Weapon was not focus of search

POLICE were not looking for a murder weapon the first time they searched the residence of the man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting, the Supreme Court has heard. Full story here


Ex girlfriend was too scared to tell police what she saw

THE former girlfriend of the man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting has told the Supreme Court she was too scared to tell police what she saw in the days that followed the baby’s death. Full story here


Stolen wallet links to baton

A WALLET and identification cards belonging to the stepfather of baby Zayden Veal-Whitting were found in a car at the home of the man accused of the child’s murder, the Supreme Court has heard. Read full story here


Court hears Hicks tell of burglaries and ICE

THE man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting told an undercover police officer he had been on ICE and was committing burglaries the night the child was killed. Full story here

DNA on baton matches accused man

A HOME-MADE baton alleged to be the weapon used to kill a 10-month-old baby was found carrying DNA matching the man accused of the murder, the Supreme Court has heard. Read full story here


No blood on baton: expert

A HOME-MADE baton which prosecutors allege was used to bludgeon a baby to death did not have traces of blood, a court has heard. Full story here


Defence questions search

THE defence counsel of the man accused of murdering Long Gully baby Zayden Veal-Whitting has questioned how thoroughly police searched for a murder weapon. Full story here


Detective links baton with baby’s injuries

THE detective  responsible for the investigation into the killing of Zayden Veal-Whitting says the discovery of a home-made baton alleged by the Crown to be the murder weapon was a “chance finding’’. Full story here

Crown gives closing address in Hicks trial. 

THE Crown is giving its closing address in the Supreme Court in the hope of proving beyond reasonable doubt the accused man Harley Hicks killed baby Zayden Veal-Whitting. Read full story here


Crown says case is ‘jigsaw’

PROSECUTORS have told a Supreme Court jury the case against the man accused of murdering Long Gully baby Zayden Veal-Whitting is like a jigsaw puzzle. Read full story here


‘False killer’ story is about Hicks, Crown says

THE crown says a story made up about a ‘false killer’ by the man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting was actually his own story. Full story here

Hicks jury asked to put aside prejudice

THE jury has been asked to put aside any prejudice against the man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting and judge the case against him on the evidence. Full story here


Hicks told lies to protect: defence

A SUPREME Court jury has been asked to consider the possibility Harley Hicks told lies to protect someone else, possibly his twin brother. Read full story here


Defence says baton was murder weapon

LAWYERS defending the man accused of murdering baby Zayden Veal-Whitting have ruled out the child’s stepfather as a possible ‘other’ for causing the death – but have put to the Supreme Court that Harley Hicks is covering for someone. Read full story here


Hicks defence says evidence doesn’t fit

THE defence team representing Harley Hicks says there are five key pieces evidence that don’t fit with the prosecution’s case the accused man killed Zayden Veal-Whitting. Read full story here


Harley Hicks found guilty of murder. Full coverage here

Hicks guilty of baby murder. Read story here

A liar, a thief and a killer

Hicks’ mum breached judge’s order

Woman cautioned in Hicks trial for following witnesses out of court

Jury asks questions about Hicks coaching brother in witness box

EDITORIAL: Thoughts are with Zayden’s family.

Zayden’s family tells of heavy hearts

THE family of Zayden Veal-Whitting doesn’t want to live in a world of hate – but that intense and deep emotion blankets them because of the “monster’’ who killed their little boy. Read full story here

The plea hearing

Crown calls for life sentence for baby killer in plea hearing in the Supreme Court.

Mother’s plea to drug users

Mother of baby Zayden Veal-Whitting wants son’s killer to stay behind bars for life … and makes plea to ice users to think of her little boy and give up the drug. Read full story here

Hicks to be sentenced

Harley Hicks will be sentenced on June 13. Full story here


GALLERY: The Harley Hicks trial

GALLERY: The committal

GALLERY: The trial

GALLERY: Exhibits tendered during the trial

Adrian Bayley Pleads Guilty to Rape – Not Guilty to Murdering Jill Meagher

MAJOR UPDATE 26/03/2015

Jill Meagher killer Adrian Bayley found guilty of three more rapes

Updated 3 minutes ago

One of Australia’s most notorious predators, murderer and serial rapist Adrian Bayley, has been found guilty of three more brutal rapes of young women in Melbourne in the years before he murdered Jill Meagher.

Bayley, 43, raped and murdered the 29-year-old ABC staffer as she walked home from a night out in Brunswick in Melbourne’s north in September 2012, in a crime that shocked the nation.

Now, it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that Bayley raped other women, including a young Dutch tourist in 2012, and two young prostitutes – one of them also in 2012 and the other almost 15 years ago.

Bayley pleaded not guilty in all three rape trials before the County Court, forcing the victims to give evidence and re-live their trauma in a series of trials that began last year and ended today.

His defence argued that while they did not dispute that the women had been victims of sexual assault, they had mistaken their attacker for Bayley because he had been so prominent in the media.

Broad suppression orders have prevented publication of any details from the three rape trials.

But with the return of the third guilty verdict the suppressions have been lifted.

Adrian Bayley pleaded not guilty in all three trials

The victim in the first trial, held in July last year, was 18 years old in late 2000, and the court heard was from a good home, but became hooked on heroin when she was 14 and turned briefly to prostitution.

In his closting arguments, Senior Prosecutor Peter Rose QC said Bayley, who worked shiftwork in a nearby bakery at the time, was the woman’s third client and her last.

Horrific details emerged in court of the teenager’s sustained ordeal at the hands of Bayley, after he drove her in his car into a narrow laneway in St Kilda, out of sight of passing traffic.

Raping his victims in his car after parking it in confined spaces to ensure they could not escape would become a critical hallmark of Bayley’s offending.

Mr Rose said that at one point during the assault, another car drove into the laneway, and the teenager banged on the back window and mouthed “help me, please help me”.

But Bayley put his fingers down her throat so she could not breathe and threatened to kill her and the car drove away.

“[Bayley] said ‘you little slut, no-one will miss you’,” Mr Rose told the first jury.

“She was frozen with fear … she had never felt such fear in her life.

“She believed he was taking her somewhere to kill her.”

The prosecutor told the court it would be 11 years before she told authorities what had happened, later telling police “it all added up” when she heard about Ms Meagher’s murder, and saw Bayley’s image.

When she read about Jill Meagher, she immediately identified [Adrian Bayley’s] face.

Senior Prosecutor Peter Rose QC

“When she read about Jill Meagher, she immediately identified his face,” Mr Rose said.

In a chilling twist of the case, the court heard when she was first approached by Bayley, the teenager had just come from a prostitutes’ collective centre where she had been given a pamphlet with warnings of “bad men” who had been harassing local sex workers.

The 18-year-old was reading the pamphlet when she got into Bayley’s car and told him she could not believe “how many bad people are out there”.

Bayley told her he was “one of those bad guys”, Mr Rose said.

Two more rapes just months before Jill Meagher attack

The victim in the second rape trial was another street prostitute attacked by Bayley several months before the fatal attack on Ms Meagher.

The court heard she was 25 years old when Bayley picked her up in his car and drove it into a narrow, dead-end laneway in Elwood in April 2012.

Bayley told his victim that it was stupid she did not have a pimp or a “spotter” looking out for her, the prosecutor said.

Key points

  • Adrian Bayley was brought to three separate trials from July 2014 for three rapes
  • One of the rapes happened in 2000 and two in 2012
  • He was found guilty in all three trials, after pleading not guilty
  • Suppression orders on reporting were lifted upon the conclusion of third case in March 2015
  • Bayley pleaded guilty to killing Jill Meagher in 2012 and was sentenced to life in prison, with a minimum of 35 years
  • He had previously served a total of 11 years in prison for the rape and attempted rape of a total of eight women
  • He was first jailed in 1991 for a minimum of three years for raping two teenagers and attempting to rape another when he was 19
  • He was jailed again in 2001 for a minimum of eight years for raping five prostitutes over six months in 2000
  • In 2012 while on parole, he assaulted a man in Geelong
  • Bayley was on parole when he raped and murdered Ms Meagher and when he raped two other women in preceding months

Mr Rose told the court that when the victim struck out with her legs, cracking the windscreen, Bayley told her that he could “keep her for ages” and no-one would know she was missing.

At one point during the attack, the court heard Bayley wound up the car’s windows to muffle his victim’s screams.

The court heard he was also preoccupied with her identifying him from his tattoos.

Eventually, she convinced him to drive to a nearby hotel to use the bathroom, and when she came out and refused his demand to get back into the car, he drove away.

It was eight months later, three months after Jill Meagher was murdered, that the 25-year-old saw a police photo on a television report about another sex attack in St Kilda and called Crime Stoppers.

The jury in the second trial took less than an hour to return a guilty verdict.

In the third trial, the victim gave evidence via video-link from the Netherlands.

The prosecutor told the court that the Dutch tourist was walking home alone from the popular Elephant and Wheelbarrow pub in St Kilda in July 2012 on the night she was attacked.

She had been walking for half an hour from the beach precinct and was almost at St Kilda Road near her Balaclava share house, when she noticed two cars parked by the side of the road.

Mr Rose said the 27-year-old was “a little drunk” and when the driver of one of the cars beckoned her over to tell her he had seen a car following her and offered to drive her home, she got in.

He covered her mouth to stop her yelling and held her throat. He told her she couldn’t get out and no-one would hear her. She was afraid she was going to be killed.

Senior Prosecutor Peter Rose QC

That man was Bayley, Mr Rose told the court, and instead of taking her home, he drove to a small dark parking space near some apartments and “stopped between two fences”.

“She asked to get out … he said no,” Mr Rose told the jury.

“He said, ‘you can’t get out so you may as well have sex with me’.

“He then hit her to the side of the face … he covered her mouth to stop her yelling and held her throat. He told her she couldn’t get out and no-one would hear her.

“She was afraid she was going to be killed.”

Mr Rose said the young woman capitulated in fear for her life and encouraged Bayley to come back to her house, in the hope of escaping.

When he agreed and drove her home, she ran inside screaming and locked herself in the bathroom.

She told her housemates she thought she was going to die … she was crying hysterically.

Senior Prosecutor Peter Rose QC

The court heard Bayley took several steps inside the share house but fled when he realised other people were home.

The woman’s housemates called triple-0.

“She told her housemates she thought she was going to die … she was crying hysterically,” Mr Rose said.

Two months later, Bayley attacked Jill Meagher.

He was arrested five days later at his Coburg home, and led detectives to a shallow grave on a quiet road on Melbourne’s outer north-western fringe.

Bayley’s phone records, obtained during the investigation of Ms Meagher’s murder, showed that he was in St Kilda on the night of the backpacker’s rape.

Defence argued false identification of Adrian Bayley

The media blackout extended across all three County Court trials and jurors in all three of them were told nothing of the other cases pending against Bayley.

But such is Bayley’s notoriety in light of Ms Meagher’s rape and death, the court and lawyers took the extraordinary step of telling the pool of potential jurors at each trial exactly who he was in relation to that crime, right from the beginning.

“That is Adrian Bayley,” said defence lawyer Saul Holt, pointing across the courtroom during his opening statement in the third trial, just concluded.

That is Adrian Bayley … You know who he is.

Defence lawyer Saul Holt tells jurors as he points across the court

“You know who he is.”

Mr Holt said even if jurors had not been told of Bayley’s background, “you would probably have found out on your own anyway”.

“Please remember when you were empanelled, you were confident you could be impartial,” he told the jury.

“You took an oath to try this case only on the evidence. Please don’t fill in the gaps … distasteful as [the Jill Meagher case] is.”

Judge Sue Pullen also cautioned the jurors.

“It’s absolutely essential you put it out of your minds completely,” Judge Pullen said.

“It is essential not to look on the internet … or to investigate the background of Mr Bayley.

“We all have biases, we all have prejudices. I don’t expect everyone to lose them overnight but … you have to make a decision coldly, clinically.”

In all three trials, Mr Holt told jurors the defence did not dispute the victims were brutally raped, and that “something awful” happened to them.

But he told the juries, the victims had it wrong.

“In September 2012 he was arrested for the rape and murder of Jill Meagher and his details were everywhere … she [the victim] has identified things that she says were from him and that she’s got elsewhere,” Mr Holt said in the second trial of Bayley.

“Use your head, not your heart. Suspend your disbelief about the fact that I would defend him after all that you know about him.

“She [the victim] has jumped on the Adrian Bayley bandwagon.”

In returning three guilty findings, the jurors ultimately disagreed.

One of Victoria’s most violent criminals

The convictions add to a virtually unsurpassed record of violent sexual offending from a man in and out of prison and on the radar of authorities over many years, who was on parole when he attacked some of his victims, including Ms Meagher.

That last fatal attack on Ms Meagher horrified the community, leading to an enormous outpouring of grief and anger, with mainstream and social media coverage of a volume never seen before.

The extent of Bayley’s offending was last revealed when he was sentenced by Supreme Court Justice Geoffrey Nettle in June 2013 to life in prison, with a non-parole period of 35 years for the rape and murder of Ms Meagher.

“As your criminal record reveals, you are a recidivist violent sexual offender … in terms of moral culpability your killing of the deceased ranks among the worst kinds conceivable,” Justice Nettle told Bayley.

At the time, it emerged Bayley had been targeting, threatening and raping women his entire adult life.

His victims included his 16-year-old sister’s friend 25 years ago, a teenage hitchhiker and a series of St Kilda street workers in 16 rapes a decade later.

It was those crimes Bayley spent eight years in prison before his release on parole in 2010.

Adrian Bayley admitted raping and strangling Jill Meagher in a Melbourne laneway, but has pleaded not guilty to her murder.  The 41 year old will stand trial in the Victorian Supreme Court after the Deputy Chief Magistrate found there was enough evidence for a jury to convict him.  Bayley pleaded guilty to one count of rape in the Melbourne Magistrates Court yesterday and not guilty to murder and another two charges of rape.


Adrian Bayley arriving at court 5th May 2013

Adrian Bayley arriving at court 5th May 2013

ADRIAN Bayley has arrived at the Supreme Court for a hearing over the death of Melbourne woman Jill Meagher, where he is expected to plead guilty to charges of murder. More to come…

Bayley, 41, pleaded guilty in the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on March 12 to one count of raping Ms Meagher.

He pleaded not guilty to her murder and two of three counts of rape.

Bayley was set to stand trial over the murder in a Brunswick laneway in September – a year after the crime that shocked the nation.

Last moments of Jill Meagher’s life

  • by: Paul Anderson – From: Herald Sun
  • March 13, 2013 8:59AM

THE man accused of murdering Jill Meagher ran out of petrol after burying the Irish-born ABC employee in a shallow grave, according to court documents.

A police summary of the case against Adrian Bayley, tendered in court, was released to the media after Bayley’s committal hearing yesterday.According to the summary, on the night of September 21 last year, while Ms Meagher was out celebrating with friends in Brunswick, Bayley was arguing with his girlfriend at Swanston St’s Lounge Bar.

The pipeline layer, 41, was arguing with her about “jealousy and possessiveness”. His girlfriend left and returned to their home in Coburg.

“The accused (Bayley) attempted to contact his girlfriend by phone; however, she refused to answer or return text messages and phone calls,” the summary stated.

Bayley left the Lounge Bar at 12.25am and caught a taxi home. There, he changed into a blue hoodie jumper, the summary said.It was about 1am when Ms Meagher, 29, left the Brunswick Green Hotel with a friend and walked to the Etiquette Bar.

Her friend left soon after, twice offering Ms Meagher a ride in a taxi. But she declined, deciding to walk the short distance home.

On her way, outside Chemist Warehouse, she asked a group of three people for a cigarette and had a “short friendly conversation” with the trio.

She then continued on her way along Sydney Rd, towards Hope St. Bayley was in the area by that stage, and saw Ms Meagher walking alone.

“(Bayley) has run up from behind Ms Meagher before slowing to a walk as he approached her.” The Police summary said

Bayley would later tell police: “I was just walking ahead of her and we’d already interacted on Sydney Rd and that’s when she rang her brother. She was actually telling me about her father.”

Ms Meagher called her brother, Michael McKeon, at 1.35am to talk about their sick father.
Mr McKeon said he would call her back in a minute or two. He would try, but his sister’s phone would ring out several times.

Ms Meagher’s husband, Tom, knew his wife was out for drinks with workmates.

At 1.37am, he sent her a text message from their home: “Are you okay?”

The Chief Crown prosecutor, Gavin Silbert, SC, told the court it was 1.38am when Bayley “accosted” Ms Meagher and “proceeded to drag her into a laneway on Hope St between Oven St and Sydney Rd, where he has raped and strangled her”.A bin and parked car in a laneway off Hope St, Brunswick, where Jill Meagher's handbag was found

Bayley later told detectives: “I actually apologised. I can’t imagine how she felt but I know how I felt. All I thought was, ‘What have I done?’ ”

Mr Silbert told the court: “(Bayley) has left the body of the deceased in the laneway and returned to his home address, where he has collected a shovel and his white Holden Astra.”

At 1.47am, an extremely worried Tom Meagher sent his wife another text.

“Answer me, I’m really worried,” it read.

He sent another at 2.07am: “Please pick up.”

The court heard Bayley returned to the laneway at 4.22am and put Ms Meagher’s body into the boot of the car.

He drove to Blackhill Rd, Gisborne South, where he buried Ms Meagher by the side of the road.

“I cried, man, and I dug a hole . . . I didn’t cry for me,” Bayley told detectives.

Tom Meagher, meanwhile, had searched the Brunswick streets in vain.

Adrian Bayley as he was taken into custody in the back of a police car. Picture: Stephen Harman

“I kept trying to ring her but there was no answer,” he said in his police statement.

Bayley was driving home from Gisborne when his car ran out of petrol near the Calder Highway.

He managed to wave down motorist Dayle Watkins, who drove him to a nearby service station.

There, about 6am, he filled a jerry can with petrol.

Mr Watkins then drove Bayley back to his vehicle.

On September 27, after investigating the crime scene and gathering evidence, including CCTV footage and phone records, homicide detectives arrested Bayley.

“After investigators informed (Bayley) of the evidence implicating him, he made admissions,” the police summary stated.

“(Bayley) stated that it was due to the argument that he had had earlier in the night with his girlfriend, that (Bayley) had an angry and aggressive demeanour which he transferred onto the deceased.”

Yesterday, Bayley pleaded not guilty to one count of murder and two counts of rape.

He pleaded guilty to one charge of rape.


Adrian Ernest Bayley

BAYLEY: You know what? I hope I never get out, because you know why I hope that, because then no one else ever has to be hurt because someone hurts me. I don’t deal with – with hurt very well. You know it wasn’t really my intention to hurt her, you know that? When we conversed, I swear to you man – I swear to I’d – I’d just – I spoke to her and she looked – she looked distraught. Does that make sense?

DETECTIVE:Yeah it does.

BAYLEY:She didn’t look happy.

DETECTIVE:Yeah it does.

BAYLEY:And I spoke to – I spoke to hear, you now and said, look, I’ll just – I’ll – I’ll help you, you know. That’s what I said to her and she was like fu… anyway it doesn’t matter. She flipped me off and that made me angry, because I was trying to do a nice thing. You know that?

DETECTIVE: Yeah yeah.

BAYLEY: She looked distraught.

BAYLEY:She looked distraught, you know. She looked like she was lost … always try to do the right thing some – you know, most of the time and I didn’t take well to her response, you know. I just don’t wanna go through it in detail. That – I can’t.

DETECTIVE: What happened to Jill?

BAYLEY:They should have the death penalty for people like me.

DETECTIVE:I can’t tell you what’s gonna happen.

BAYLEY:No well – that’s what I hope.

DETECTIVE:So you said she fobbed you off and you got angry. Tell me what happened then?

BAYLEY:Oh I just got pissed off and I actually walked off and she followed. I actually walked in front of her and she followed.


BAYLEY:And it just got worse.

DETECTIVE:Tell me what happened.

BAYLEY:(Starts to cry) … like a big sissy man.

BAYLEY:I wanna do the right thing. It’s not fair on any of this to – it’s not fair of any of this stuff to have happened, let alone her family and stuff too.


BAYLEY:Not knowing.

DETECTIVE:Would you be willing to come with me and show me?

BAYLEY:I’ll try. I’ll do my best man.

DETECTIVE:I appreciate that.

BAYLEY:I’m not sure how to get there.

BAYLEY:I know what I’m saying to you. It’s not fair for this to have happened, and it’s not fair on her family and its not fair on them not knowing. It’s not fair.

DETECTIVE:Um. I understand why you don’t want to go into the detail. I understand that totally. Um how – how did she die?

BAYLEY: (Starts to cry). I strangled her.


BAYLEY: (Continues to cry). What have I done? What have I done man?

DETECTIVE:And where did that happen?

BAYLEY:On Hope Street.

DETECTIVE:How did she come to get in the laneway?

BAYLEY:we – we walked past it.


BAYLEY:That far down Hope St. I didn’t take her from the street, or – you know?

DETECTIVE: Yeah and then?

BAYLEY:And we were just talking you know? We weren’t – there was no argument, there was no – it was just talking. And then um …


BAYLEY:I was just walking ahead of her and we’d already interacted on Sydney Rd, and that’s when she rang her brother. She was actually telling me about her father.


BAYLEY:You know? And I was just – I was trying to be nice and – she kept going from being nice to nasty, to nice, to – you know what I mean?


BAYLEY:And it just sort of ended up in the alley. I cant remember yeah, you know what I mean, 100 per cent, like how it ended up. We were just sort of – we were standing there.

DETECTIVE: Um how did you – how did you strangle her?

BAYLEY:With my hands.

DETECTIVE:With your hands. And once that had happened, what did you do?

(interview interrupted by knock at door, then resumes)

BAYLEY:I didn’t run.

DETECTIVE:You didn’t run?

BAYLEY:(starts to cry) That’s not it man. I actually apologised.


BAYLEY:But I didn’t run. I didn’t – didn’t know what to do. It’s a horrible feeling man.


BAYLEY:I can’t imagine how – how she felt, but I know how I felt. It’s not nice man, its not nice. And all I thought was what have I done? That’s all I thought. That was the thought in my head, what have I done after I said sorry. I didn’t know what else to say, man. I don’t know what else to say.

DETECTIVE:And what happened to her belongings?

BAYLEY:The phone I smashed. Just the other stuff I threw.

DETECTIVE:You walk to the side, you get the shovel. Tell me what you do.

BAYLEY:I cried man, and I dug a hole.


BAYLEY: I cried man, And I didn’t cry for me, you need to understand that. I didn’t cry for me, just like I’m not crying for me now.

Jill Meagher


Saturday September 22, 2012

  • 1.30am: Jill Meagher leaves Bar Etiquette in Sydney Rd, Brunswick, in Melbourne’s inner-north to walk home. CCTV from the Dutchess Boutique captures both Ms Meagher and Adrian Bayley walking past.
  • 1.38am: Mr Bayley allegedly grabs Ms Meagher and drags her into a nearby laneway off Hope St.
  • 1.40am – 1.45am: Neighbours hear a woman yelling from laneway. After a few minutes the yelling stops.
  • 2am: Tom Meagher tries calling his wife’s mobile phone.
  • 4am: Mr Meagher leaves his home in Lux Way – not far from the scene – to go and look for his wife.
  • 4.22am: It is alleged that having gone home to Coburg in Melbourne’s northern suburbs for a shovel, Mr Bayley returns in his white Holden Astra.
  • 4.26am: Car allegedly drives off with Ms Meagher’s body in the boot.
  • 6am: After continuing to call his wife’s phone all night without luck, Mr Meagher reports her missing.

Sunday September 23

  • 12.30pm: A Facebook page is set up in the hope somebody saw Ms Meagher.
  • 3.15pm: Police release public call for information about Ms Meagher’s disappearance.

Monday September 24

  • 6.30am: Ms Meagher’s handbag found in lane off Hope St. Police believe it was planted the day before.
  • 8.50am: Homicide squad takes over the case.
  • 1.45pm: Forensic officers recover evidence from the lane way. Detectives interview Mr Meagher.

Tuesday September 25

  • 12.30pm: Forensic police search the Meagher home and take away their car and bags of items for testing.
  • 3.55pm: Police release footage from the Dutchess Boutique of Ms Meagher and a man in a blue hoodie.
  • 6.15pm: Police return to the Meagher home and search again.

Thursday September 27

  • 2.30pm: Mr Bayley arrested in Coburg.
  • 3.58pm: Police interview with Mr Bayley begins.
  • 10pm: Interview suspended while police travel to a site allegedly nominated by Mr Bayley.

Friday September 28

  • 3am: Mr Bayley remanded at an out-of-sessions hearing after being charged with murder.
  • 4am: Ms Meagher’s body is taken away by coronial staff after being recovered from a shallow grave at the side of Black Hill Rd in Gisborne South, north of Melbourne.

How much longer till the police pounce on Baden-Clay killer?

Been a few days since an update and the other thread is getting very slow to load thanks to hundreds upon hundreds of comments and discussion. The stuff I’m hearing around the traps is amazing, and if I were in any way whatsoever involved in this I would be getting my affairs in order, because there is not a lot of time left on freedom street.

The Original extensive coverage here folks, with many more pictures and important videos…It is slow to load with so many comments…


These are the Baden-Clay cars, any connection to a smaller blue 4 wheel drive I wonder?

A WITNESS has told police of seeing two four-wheel-drives near Kholo Creek crossing early on the day Allison Baden-Clay was reported missing.

It is alleged a white four-wheel-drive didn’t have its headlights on, only parking lights, and was closely tailing a smaller, blue four-wheel-drive at about 4am on April 20.

The witness told of noticing the vehicles at Anstead in Brisbane’s west – within 2km of where the 43-year-old mother of three’s body was found 10 days later. Police said Mrs Baden-Clay was reported missing by her husband Gerard at 7.30am Friday after she failed to return from her usual morning walk.

He told police he had last seen his wife at their Brookfield home about 10pm the previous night.

It is understood several members of the community have come forward with information, triggering a number of new lines of investigation.

Police have established a major incident room with detectives, intelligence analysts and forensic officers to help with the investigation.
A trust fund has been set up for the daughters of Allison Baden-Clay. Donations can be made through the NAB to BSB: 084 737, account: 133 196 502, or via

They are believed to be awaiting results from forensic tests including toxicology.

The Baden-Clays’ cars – a white Toyota Prado four-wheel-drive and a silver Holden Captiva – were taken in by police for forensic tests and have since been released.

Mrs Baden-Clay’s funeral, held last Friday, included a guard of honour by students from Ipswich Girls’ Grammar where she was vice-captain.

Talks are under way to establish a memorial plaque for the mother of three as tributes continue to pour in.

Several fundraisers have been held.

Well-wishers wanting to help the Baden-Clay family have been encouraged to donate to the Allison Baden-Clay appeal. Donations can be made via NAB to BSB: 084737, account number: 133196502.

Celebrations at this week’s Brookfield Show, held just 200m from the Baden-Clays’ home, are expected to be somewhat sombre.

The show, which begins tomorrow at Brookfield Showgrounds where police set up a command post while they searched for Mrs Baden-Clay , was sponsored last year by Gerard Baden-Clay’s Century 21 real estate franchise.

The Baden-Clay family have been members of the Brookfield Show Society in the past but it is believed they did not renew their membership this year.

The show is expected to attract about 20,000 people.

Brookfield Show Society president James Booth said the event would be a rallying point for the community affected by the tragic loss of Mrs Baden-Clay.

How long more till the police pounce on Baden-Clay killer?

How long more will the public have to wait for the police to make an arrest over the brutal killing of Allison Baden-Clay?

Time is creeping on and the police have assured the people of Brisbane’s western suburbs there is no crazed killer on the loose ready to attack again.

If that is true, they must have their quarry well and truly within their sights and must be superbly confident the killer will not strike again.

Speculation remains at fever pitch across southeast Queensland as to the identity of the killer.

There is even a suggestion in legal circles that up to 5 people may be arrested over the murder, including accessories after the fact. Presumably, if that is right, the police will make simultaneous arrests over the next few days, which would make a 5-pronged interviewing process incredibly demanding on the police as well as putting intense pressure on those in custody to confess.

Speculation is rife that the killer may have even attended the church service at St Paul’s in Ipswich last Friday which might explain the incredible rumour circulating at the moment that the police had secret microphones planted in the flowers at the service in case someone whispered words which could be construed by a jury as a confession or an admission or indication of guilt.

It seems the police are leaving no stone unturned in this case with phone taps, vehicle tracking devices and seizure of medical and computer records no doubt just the tip of the iceberg, as the net closes on the killer who will have more explaining to do than Peter Slipper and Craig Thomson combined.

This is shaping up as the murder trial to end all trials in Queensland with justice for Allison Baden-Clay hopefully only hours away.


A SCIENTIST who gave forensic evidence in the defence of Lindy Chamberlain says Allison Baden-Clay’s body would be telling the story of her death to detectives investigating her murder.

As police reveal they are close to an arrest, one of Australia’s best-known biological scientists, professor emeritus Barry Boettcher, said pathology results would be telling police what Mrs Baden-Clay can’t.

The mother-of-three’s body was found on the banks of the Kholo Creek at Mt Crosby on April 30, 11 days after she allegedly left her Brookfield home for a late-night walk.

She was reported missing at 7.30am the following morning by her husband, Gerard.

Her body was discovered by a passing canoeist, who spotted her lying on the bank of the creek under a bridge.

It is not known whether she had been there the entire time, whether she had been moved, or whether heavy rain in the days before the discovery washed her downstream.

Prof Boettcher said in many cases, it could be easily determined.

“When somebody dies, blood will pool to the lowest portions of the body depending on how they are positioned,” he said.

“If the body is then moved, that could be determined from the body being in a different position to where the blood has already settled if the blood is not appropriate to the new position.”

He said the blood would not re-pool if a body had been in a certain position for some days.

“Forensic people would readily be able to determine whether a body had been moved after several days,” Prof Boettcher said.

The professor said it was unusual to get useful information from under someone’s fingernails.

“Material under the fingernails would suffer from being in water but secondly – and I have specifically done a study on this – it is a beautiful spot for bacteria to grow,” Prof Boettcher said.

“Material under the fingernails will get digested from under the fingernails in just a few hours.

“I often scoff at television programs that show people being convicted on vital evidence obtained from under fingernails because it needs to be obtained very rapidly.”

He said it could take weeks for police to receive all the results from forensic tests.

Former lecturer and author of Crucial Errors in Murder Investigations Ted Duhs, who has worked with Prof Boettcher, said it was obvious police were working to eliminate various theories on the killer.

“A murder is about theories, who the perpetrator was, what the motive was and so on,” he said.

“I noticed the investigating detective said he did not believe it was a random killing – and if that is true then they have eliminated at least one theory.”

Detective Superintendent Mark Ainsworth confirmed this weekend that police did not believe Mrs Baden-Clay was killed by a random attacker.

“At this stage we don’t believe it is random,” he said.

“We believe that Allison may have known her attacker.”

Yesterday, Mrs Baden-Clay’s three daughters, aged 10, 8 and 5, had their first Mother’s Day without her.

My Poem dedicated to Allison by Robbo

Silly man, thought you could play
By making the wife just go away…

Weak and cowardly, you lied and lied
Knowing your kids mummy, had already died

You tried to hide and play so sad
Made everyone around you so very mad

Coward Clay, a poor excuse of a man
You are on your way to a prison van.



Paul Charles Denyer -The Frankston Serial Killer

Paul Charles Denyer

A.K.A.: “The Frankston Serial Killer

Classification: Serial killer

Characteristics: Transsexual – He hated women in general

Number of victims: 3

Date of murders: June-July 1993

Date of arrest: July 31, 1993

Date of birth: April 14, 1972

Victims profile: Elizabeth Stevens, 18 / Debbie Fream, 22 / Natalie Russell, 17

Method of murder: Stabbing with knife / Strangulation

Location: Melbourne, Australia

Status: Sentenced to life in prison on December 20, 1993

UPDATE 08/05/12

FRANKSTON serial killer Paul Denyer is being investigated over claims he raped a fellow prisoner.

Police are currently interviewing Denyer over the alleged rape on April 14 at Port Phillip Prison.

The incident allegedly occurred when Denyer, who in 1993 killed three women in a hate-filled rage, raped a fellow inmate after what initially started as a massage.

Appearing via video-link before Melbourne Magistrates’ Court, Denyer refused to face the monitor but told Magistrate Michelle Ehrlich he understood what the investigation was about and consented to questioning.

Magistrate Ehrlich granted police, from Footscray’s sexual crimes unit, four hours in which to interview Denyer after investigators lodged a 464B application to question the suspect in custody.

Late last year, Denyer also faced an interview inside the maximum-security jail by homicide detectives over missing woman Sarah MacDiarmid, who disappeared in 1990.

He denied any knowledge of the MacDiarmid case.

Paul Charles Denyer (b. 1972) is an Australian serial killer, currently serving life imprisonment in HM Prison Barwon for the murders of Elizabeth Stevens, 18, Debbie Fream, 22, and Natalie Russell, 17 in Frankston, Victoria in 1993.

Denyer is known as the Frankston Serial Killer due to his crimes occurring within the Frankston area. The Frankston Serial Killer was featured in the pilot episode of the Seven Network show Forensic Investigators.

Early life

When Denyer was a child his mother recalls him rolling from a table and hurting his head. He once cut the family’s kitten and hung it from a tree. At school, he once assaulted a fellow student whilst the victim was chewing a pen, causing the pen to become lodged in the victims throat.

Sex reassignment requests

Whilst imprisoned, Denyer has requested to be allowed to purchase and wear ladies cosmetics, a request which was denied.

Denyer also filed freedom of information requests to learn of the Victorian government’s policy on gender reassignment surgery for prisoners and has sought evaluation to determine his suitablity for such surgery, which was also rejected by medical specialists.


Denyer was 21 at the time of his crimes. During a police interview, Denyer’s motivation for his crimes was revealed when he replied to questions stating he hated women in general.

POLICE: Can you explain why we have women victims?
DENYER: I just hate them.

POLICE: I beg your pardon.
DENYER: I hate them.

POLICE: Those particular girls or women in general?
DENYER: General.

The Frankston Serial Killer: Paul Charles Denyer

by Paul B. Kidd

Frankston, Victioria, Australia 1993

Over a seven week period in the summer of  1993, three young women, ages 17, 18 and 22, were violently stabbed and slashed to death — one in broad daylight, in and around Frankston, about a 40-minute drive from Melbourne on Port Phillip Bay in south eastern Victoria. Another 41-year-old woman was violently assaulted and considered herself lucky to escape with her life.

None of the victims knew each other and there was nothing to connect them in any way except that they all lived in the Frankston district. After the first two murders and an assault in which the victim escaped, it became clear to police that there was a serial killer on the loose. The killer chose his victims at random and murdered for no apparent reason. Their theory was tragically proved correct when another young woman was  murdered a short time later.

And when he was eventually caught, the serial killer turned out to be a local, Paul Charles Denyer, a 6-foot, very overweight, 21-year-old man who answered to the nickname of John Candy, after the (now deceased) funnyman of such movies as Uncle Buck, The Blues Brothers and Cool Runnings.

But Paul Denyer, the John Candy look-a-like serial killer was no funny man. He was a pudgy, dysfunctional misfit, an oafish character and self-confessed misogynist who was always going to be a monster. As a child he slit the throats of his sister’s toy bears and grew up obsessed with blood and gore movies such as The Stepfather, Fear and Halloween, which he watched over and over.

Paul Denyer was a beast who slit the throat of the family kitten with his brother’s pocketknife and hung the dead animal from a tree branch. After his arrest for murder it was discovered that it was Denyer who had disemboweled a friend’s cat and slit the throats of it’s kittens. Killing human beings was only a matter of time.

When he was captured, Denyer displayed absolutely no emotion as he told horrified police how he murdered the three women. He also told arresting officers that he had had the urge to kill since he was 14.  “I’ve always wanted to kill, waiting for the right time, waiting for that silent alarm to trigger me off,” he told them.

The Frankston Serial Killer was born Paul Charles Denyer in Sydney on April 14, 1972, the third of six children, five boys and a girl to English working class immigrants, Maureen and Anthony Denyer, who came to Australia in 1965 and eventually settled in Campbelltown near Sydney.

The only significant thing about Paul Denyer’s infancy was that as a baby he rolled off a bench and knocked his head. This became a family joke for many years and whenever he would say or do anything out of the ordinary it would prompt the comment “that’s because you fell on your head as a baby.”

Denyer had trouble mixing with the other kids at kindergarten but seemed to grow out of this by the time he reached primary school and was just one of the normal kids. But that all changed when the family moved to Victoria in 1981 so that Anthony Denyer could take up the position as manager of The Steak Place in Centre Road, South Oakleigh, on the Frankston train line.

None of Anthony Denyer’s children approved of the move. They were happy at Campbelltown and Paul especially found it extremely hard to make the adjustment. At his new school, Northvale Primary, he was a completely different boy, a loner who found it difficult to make friends and who lacked self-confidence and was totally unmotivated.

To make matters worse, Paul Denyer grew into a big lump of a lad, much taller and a lot fatter than the other kids. And instead of playing with the usual things that would occupy a boy of his age, he grew up fascinated with his collection of knives and clubs and home-made slingshot-guns that fired pebbles or ball bearings.

His murderous intentions started at an early age when he regularly dissected his sister’s teddy bears with a homemade knife, and when he was 10, he stabbed the family kitten and hung it from a tree in the backyard. Later on, while working at what would be his last place of employment, he allegedly slaughtered and dismembered two goats in a paddock next door.

Just before his thirteenth birthday Paul Denyer was charged with stealing a car and was released with a warning.  Two months later he was he was in trouble again and charged with making a false report to the fire brigade, theft and willful damage. At age 15, Denyer forced another boy to masturbate in front of some children and was charged with assault.

In 1992 he entered into a relationship with Sharon Johnson, a girl he had met while working at Safeway’s Supermarket, a job that came to an end when he allegedly deliberately knocked down a woman and a child with a convoy of empty shopping trolleys.

Denyer then applied to join the Victorian Police Force but was rejected on the grounds that he was unfit due to his massive bulk. Denyer’s last place of employment was a marine workshop where he was ultimately fired because he spent more time making crude knives and daggers than he did doing his work.

By 1993, Denyer was a social outcast. He was unable  to hold down a job through a mixture of laziness and incompetence. Now nicknamed John Candy after the rotund film star because of his bulk and physical appearance,  Denyer developed a fixation for death, the macabre and horrific murder movies such as The Stepfather which he watched repeatedly.

In 1992 Denyer moved into a flat in Dandenong Road, Frankston, with Sharon Johnson. With Denyer unemployed, Sharon held down two jobs by selling over the phone. With plenty of idle time on Paul Denyer’s hands it wasn’t long before some unusual things started to happen around the block of flats.

One tenant arrived home to find her flat broken into and her clothes and engagement pictures slashed. Another caught the glimpse of someone peeping at her through a window. But the most disturbing of all was what happened to the sister of Tricia, a girl who lived in the same block of flats as Paul Denyer and Sharon Johnson.

Denyer and Johnson had become quite friendly with their neighbor Tricia and her sister Donna, who lived with her fiancé Les and Donna’s tiny baby in a block of flats nearby.

One night in February 1993, Les and Donna arrived home at about 11 p.m. with the baby in a bassinette after working Les’s late night pizza delivery run, to be confronted with the most horrific scene. On the lounge room wall next to the television set and written in blood were the words “Dead Don.” Lying on the floor in the middle of the kitchen was the remains of Donna’s cat Buffy, with a picture of a bikini-clad woman strewn over its disemboweled body.

The cat’s entrails had been dragged through the kitchen and scattered about the walls and the cat’s blood was sprayed everywhere. Written in blood in the middle of it all were the words “Donna – You’re Dead.” One of Buffy’s eyes was bulging from its socket. The other eye was missing, apparently ripped out of the unfortunate cat’s head and discarded.

In the bathroom they found Buffy’s two kittens with their throats cut lying in a baby’s bath of bloodied water. In the laundry there was blood everywhere, sprayed all up the walls and all over a plastic laundry basket full of baby clothes.

In the main bedroom the intruder had ransacked every drawer and clothes were ripped and strewn everywhere. Les’s collection of centerfold pin-ups had been slashed and stabbed with a sharp instrument. Cupboard doors had been kicked and beaten, leaving splintered gouges in them. The baby’s clothing had been slashed and a stabbed photo of a semi-clad model was draped across the baby’s crib. The words “Donna and Robyn” had been sprayed in white shaving foam on the dressing table mirror.

Donna didn’t have the faintest idea who the mysterious Robyn was and she never spent another night at the flat, instead staying temporarily with her sister Tricia until she found alternative accommodations.

Tricia’s neighbor, Paul Denyer, who knew Donna quite well through Tricia, told Donna that she would be safe now and that if the police ever caught the person responsible he would personally take care of him for her.

On Saturday, June 12, 1993, the partially-clothed body of 18-year-old student Elizabeth Stevens was found in Lloyd Park on the Cranbourne Road, Langwarrin, a short drive from Frankston. The teenager had been reported missing the previous evening by her uncle and aunt whom she was staying with.

Naked from the waist up, Elizabeth Stevens had had her throat cut, there were six deep knife wounds to her chest, four deep cuts running from her breast to her navel and four more running at right angles forming a macabre criss-cross pattern on her abdomen. Elizabeth Stevens’ face had several cuts and abrasions and her nose was swollen indicating that it had been broken. Her bra was up around her neck. A post-mortem would reveal that she hadn’t been sexually assaulted.

The killing was as senseless as it was brutal. Elizabeth didn’t have an enemy in the world. The attack had to be that of a random killer or perhaps a rape gone wrong. Police mounted a huge search for the killer. They used a life-sized mannequin at a roadblock at the bus stop where Elizabeth Stevens was last seen  in the hope that someone may recognize her and hopefully the person she may have been with.

They knocked on every door in the district and questioned bus drivers and passengers who were on Elizabeth Stevens’ last known bus ride. They checked out every known library in the vicinity of where she was last known to have been. It all amounted to nothing.

On the evening of  July 8, 1993, 41-year-old bank clerk Roszsa Toth was making her way home from work to Seaford in the Frankston district when she was violently attacked by a man who said he had a gun and tried to drag her into a nearby nature reserve.

Mrs. Toth put up a  fight for her life during which the man pulled out clumps of her hair  and she bit his fingers to the bone on several occasions. She eventually fought the man off and with torn stockings and trousers and no shoes she managed to hail down a passing car as her assailant fled into the night. Roszsa Toth had little doubt that had she not resisted so strongly she would have most definitely been murdered.

Mrs. Toth rang the police who were at the scene of the assault within minutes. They found nothing. Later that same evening 22-year-old Debbie Fream who had given birth to a son, Jake, 12 days earlier, went missing after she drove to her local store at Seaford to pick up a bottle of milk while in the middle of preparing dinner.

Four days later her body was found by a farmer in one of his paddocks at nearby Carrum Downs. Debbie Fream had been stabbed about the neck, head, chest and arms 24 times. She had also been strangled. She had not been sexually assaulted.

The attack of Roszsa Toth, which had been considered a purse snatching gone horribly wrong, was now considered to be the work of the same killer of Elizabeth Stevens and Debbie Fream. There was a madman on the loose in Frankston.

The women of the Frankston district locked themselves indoors and the streets were noticeably deserted at night. Real estate sales and rental inquiries plummeted. Frankston became known as the place where a serial killer lurked among its residents and everyone was a suspect. Every day the newspapers gave an update and detailed reports of the huge police manhunt that was underway to track down the killer.

Police were relentless in their investigations. Every lead, no matter how small, was followed up and even the slightest clue as to the assailant’s identity was looked into immediately. A help center named Operation Reassurance was set up to advise local women what they  should do if  attacked by the Frankston Serial Killer and how to prevent from being attacked in the first place.

But it was to no avail. On the afternoon of July 30,  17-year-old Natalie Russell went missing while riding her bike home from the John Paul College in Frankston. Eight hours later, her body was found in the bushes beside a bike track that ran between the Peninsula and the Long Island Golf clubs. She had been stabbed repeatedly about the face and neck and her throat had been cut. It appeared that the savagery in Natalie Russell’s slaying  was far worse than in the previous two victims.  Natalie had not been sexually assaulted.

But this time the killer had left a damning piece of evidence that would prove him guilty should he be apprehended. A piece of skin, possibly from a finger, was found on the neck of the dead girl. It didn’t belong to the victim; the only other possible explanation was that the killer had cut himself as he attacked the student and the slither of flesh had attached itself –  stuck by dried blood – onto her skin.

The other good news was the sighting of a yellow Toyota Corona on a road near the bike track at 3 p.m., the time the coroner estimated that Natalie Russell had been murdered. The observant police officer had written down its number from its registration label because the car had no plates.

Back at the police station, detectives fed the registration number into their computer. It matched up with a report from a postman who had spotted a man slumped in a suspicious position, as if to avoid being seen, in the front seat of a yellow Toyota Corona.  A quick check through the computer also revealed that the same car had been spotted in the vicinity where Debbie Fream’s body had been found. Three sightings of the one vehicle were  just too much of a coincidence.

The car was registered to a Paul Charles Denyer who wasn’t home when detectives Mick Hughes and Charlie Bezzina called at his address at 3.40 p.m. They left a card under the door asking him to contact them as soon as he arrived home. At 5.15 p.m. the detectives received a call from a Sharon Johnson and, so as not to frighten Denyer away, she was told that it was merely a ‘routine inquiry’ and that they were interviewing everyone in the district. Within 10 minutes, a team of detectives, headed by Mick Hughes, Rod Wilson and CIB Detective Darren O’Loughlin, converged at the block of flats at 186 Frankston‑Dandenong Road.

Paul Denyer answered the door and commented that he was surprised to see so many detectives for just a routine inquiry, but he cheerily let them in. He explained that while his car had no plates he had a permit to drive it for 28 days while he made necessary repairs to have it registered.

As Denyer explained his whereabouts at the time of the murders, the detectives noticed that his hands were cut in several places. From one cut, the skin was missing and they mentally noted that the missing piece would have resembled that which was found on Natalie Russell’s body.

Although he admitted to being in the vicinity of two of the murders at the time they were believed to have taken place, Denyer steadfastly denied any knowledge of the killings other than what he had read in the papers. He offered weak excuses for being at the murder scenes, saying that his car had broken down near the place where Natalie Russell was murdered and that he was waiting to pick up his girlfriend from the train on the other occasion. He explained the scratches away by saying that he got his hands caught in the fan while working underneath the bonnet of the car.

But there was no fooling the seasoned detectives. They knew they had their man and that it was only a matter of time before he would crack. Taken to Frankston police station and questioned in an interrogation room while being video‑recorded, Denyer maintained his innocence through to the early hours of the following morning. But he knew his number was up when police asked for a blood sample and a sample of his hair and told him that a DNA test would match him to anything on his vic­tim that came from him.

Denyer asked some questions about how long the DNA results would take and whether or not the police had something with which to compare his DNA. Then he thought for a bit and, out of the blue, volunteered, “Okay, I killed all three of them,” to Detective Darren O’Loughlin.

Just before 4 o’clock on the morning of August 1, 1993, Paul Denyer began his confession to the murders of Elizabeth Stevens, Debbie Fream and Natalie Russell, and the attack on Roszsa Toth. He told them that at around 7 p.m. on the bleak, rainy evening of June 11, 1993, Elizabeth Stevens got off a bus on Cranbourne Road, Langwarrin, to walk the short distance to her home. Paul Denyer was waiting – not for Elizabeth in particular. Anyone. Just someone to kill. Elizabeth Stevens just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Denyer followed the young student along the street in the dense rain and grabbed her from behind, telling her that he had a gun and that if she screamed or tried to run away he would kill her. He told detectives that the “gun” he held in her back was in fact a piece of aluminum piping with a wooden handle. At “gunpoint,” Denyer marched the terrified girl to nearby Lloyd Park.

Denyer’s statement said in part: “Walked in a bit of bushland beside the main track in Lloyd Park. Sat there, you know, stood in the bushes for a while just – I can’t remember, just standing there I suppose. I held the ‘gun’ to the back of her neck, walked across the track over towards the other small sandhill or something. And on the other side of that hill, she asked me if she could, you know – go to the toilet, so to speak. So I respected her privacy. So I turned around and everything while she did it and everything. When she finished we just walked down towards where the goal posts are and we turned right and headed towards the area where she was found. I got to that area there and I started choking her with my hands and she passed out after a while. You know, the oxygen got cut off to her head and she just stopped. And then I pulled out the knife … and stabbed her many times in the throat. And she was still alive. And then she stood up and then we walked around and all that, just walking around a few steps, and then I threw her on the ground and stuck my foot over her neck to finish her off.”

The manner in which Denyer gave his confession chilled the detectives to the bone. It was devoid of emotion or remorse —  almost flippant. When the detectives asked questions they were answered in an almost condescending manner, as if Denyer was in complete control of the situation because he was the only one who knew what had actually happened.

Denyer described, matter-of-factly, and demonstrated how he had pushed his thumb into Elizabeth Stevens’s throat and strangled her. He made a stabbing motion, showing how he stabbed and slashed her throat. Then, to the astonishment of the detectives, he demonstrated for the video camera how Elizabeth Stevens’s body had begun shaking and shuddering as she went through the death rattles before finally dying.

Denyer then told police how he had dragged Elizabeth Stevens’s body to the drain and left it, where it was eventually found. He explained that the blade of the homemade knife he had used to stab Elizabeth Stevens  had bent during the assault and had broken away from the handle. He dumped the pieces beside the road as he made his way from the murder scene.

When asked why he had killed Elizabeth Stevens, Denyer replied: “Just wanted … just wanted to kill. Just wanted to take a life because I felt my life had been taken many times.”

After a long and detailed confession to the first murder, Paul Denyer went on to tell of the events of the night of July 8, 1993. He told detectives Wilson and O’Loughlin that he approached Mrs. Toth from behind after he had seen her walking near the Seaford station. He put a hand over her mouth and held a fake gun to her head with the other hand. Mrs Toth resisted strongly and bit his finger to the bone.

The couple wrestled and Mrs Toth escaped from his grasp and ran out into the middle of the road, but none of the passing cars stopped. Denyer chased after her, grabbed her by the hair and said: “Shut up, or I’ll blow your fucking head off,” and the woman nodded in agreement but again escaped and this time managed to flag down a passing car while Denyer fled.

When asked what he intended to do to Mrs Toth, Denyer replied coolly: “I was just gonna drag her in the park and kill her — that’s all.” Denyer said that, as well as the fake gun, he was carrying one of his homemade knives with a razor-sharp aluminum blade in his sock.

After the near miss with Mrs. Toth, Denyer went to the nearby railway station and casually boarded the Frankston-bound train. He got off at Kananook, the next station along, and crossed over the rail overpass bridge in search of another victim. Here he sighted Debbie Fream getting out of her grey Pulsar and go into the milk bar on the corner.

Denyer said that while Debbie Fream was in the milk bar, he opened the rear door of her car, let himself into the back, and closed the door behind him. He crouched in the back seat and listened as her footsteps came back to the car, and she got in and drove away. “I waited for her to start up the car so no one would hear her scream or anything,“Denyer said in his confession. “And she put it into gear and she went to do a U-turn. I startled her just as she was doing that turn and she kept going into the wall of the milk bar, which caused a dent in the bonnet. I told her to, you know, shut up or I’d blow her head off and all that shit.”

Denyer said that he held the fake gun in her side. The detectives asked Denyer if he had noticed anything in the back and he said that he had seen a baby capsule beside him in the back seat. Denyer must have known that he was about to kill a young mother. Obviously, it made the least scrap of difference to him.

Denyer told Debbie Fream in which direction to drive. It was to an area that he knew well and knew he wouldn’t be seen as he murdered her. ‘I told her when we got there that if she gave any signals to anyone, I’d blow her head off, I’d decorate the car with her brains,’ Denyer told the police.

Denyer told her to stop the car near some trees and get out, and he pulled a length of cord from his pocket. “I popped it over her eyes real quickly, so she didn’t see it . . .’cause I was gonna strangle her. But I didn’t want her to see the cord first. I lifted the cord up and I said: “Can you see this?” And she just put her hand up to grab it to feel it and when she did that I just yanked on it real quickly around her neck. And then I was struggling with her for about five minutes.” Denyer said that he strangled Debbie Fream until she started to pass out. He then drew the knife from his sock and repeatedly stabbed her about the neck and chest. When she fell limp at his feet he set upon her with the knife, stabbing her many times in the neck and once in the stomach.

“She started breathing out of her neck, just like Elizabeth Stevens,” he told the detectives. “I could just hear bubbling noises.” When asked if Debbie Fream put up any resistance, Denyer replied: “Yeah, she put up quite a fight. And her white jumper was pulled off during that time as well. I just felt the same way I did when I killed Elizabeth Stevens.”

The detectives then asked Denyer what happened after he had stabbed her round the chest and throat area. “I lifted up her top and then ploughed the knife into her gut. I wanted to see how big her boobs were.” He said that when he saw Debbie’s bare stomach he ‘”just lunged at it with the knife.”

Satisfied that Debbie Fream was dead, Denyer dragged her body into a clump of trees and covered it over with a couple of branches he broke from the nearest tree. He then spent about five minutes looking for the murder weapon which he had dropped after the killing, found it and put it in his pocket. He drove off in Debbie Fream’s car, dumped it close to where he lived, and walked home in time to ring Sharon at work and pick her up at the Kananook railway station.

The following morning, he brazenly returned to Debbie Fream’s car and collected her purse and the two cartons of milk, eggs, chocolate and a packet of cigarettes she had purchased from the milk bar the previous evening, and took them home with him. The only thing of value he found in the purse was a $20 note.

He emptied the milk down the sink, threw out the eggs and burned the carton, as he considered this to be evidence that could be used against him. He then buried the dead woman’s purse in the nearby golf course and near the bike track where he would later kill Natalie Russell. Denyer then dismantled his homemade knife and hid the parts in the air vent in the laundry of his apartment.

“Why did you kill her?” the detectives asked him.

“Same reason why I killed Elizabeth Stevens. I just wanted to,” he replied.

As the sun rose on that Sunday morning, 12 hours after they had started questioning Paul Denyer at Frankston police station, the weary detectives began questioning him about the murder of Natalie Russell.

If the detectives were showing any signs of weariness, what they were about to hear would shock them back to attentiveness with a jolt. Denyer’s almost unbelievable confession to the murder of Natalie Russell would put him among the most despicable monsters this country has ever known. Denyer had planned his next murder in advance. His intention was to abduct a young woman, any young woman, as she walked along the bike track that runs alongside the Flora and Fauna Reserve in nearby Langwarrin, drag his victim into the reserve and murder her.

He had gone to his planned abduction spot earlier in the day and, with a pair of pliers, had cut three holes a few metres apart in the cyclone wire fence that ran between the bike track and the reserve. Each hole was cut big enough to fit him and his victim through into the cover of tree-lined reserve.

At about 2:30 that afternoon, he drove back to the start of the bike track in Skye Road and waited for a victim to enter on foot. His plan was to follow his victim and, as they approached a hole in the fence, he would grab her and take her through it and into the reserve. He was armed with a razor-sharp homemade knife and a leather strap which he intended to use to strangle his victim. After a wait of about 20 minutes, he saw a girl in a blue school uniform come out of the road where John Paul College was and enter the bike track. He followed.

“I stuck about 10 yards behind her until I got to the second hole,” Denyer told the detectives. “And just when I got to that hole, I quickly walked up behind her and stuck my left hand around her mouth and held the knife to her throat…and that’s where that cut happened.” Denyer then indicated the cut on his thumb from which the piece of skin was missing. “I cut that on my own blade.”

Denyer said that Natalie was struggling at first when he grabbed her but stopped when he told her that if she didn’t he would cut her throat. The terrified girl then offered Denyer sex, which disgusted him as he clearly failed to see that Natalie must have realized that she was in the hands of the Frankston Serial Killer and would have done anything, even if it meant having sex with him, to save her life.

“She said, ‘You can have all my money, have sex with me,’ and things – just said disgusting things like that, really,” Denyer told the detectives as he shook his head in revulsion at what he obviously interpreted as the schoolgirl’s loose morals. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

Upset, Denyer forced Natalie to kneel in front of him and held the point of the knife very closely over her eye. Then he forced her to lie on the ground and he knelt over her, holding her by the throat and still holding the point of the knife over her eye. When she struggled he cut her across the face. She somehow managed to stand up and started to scream.

“And I just said, ‘Shut up. Shut up. Shut up. Shut up.’ And, ‘If you don’t shut up, I’ll kill you. If you don’t do this, I’ll kill you, if you don’t do that,’” Denyer told the detectives. “And she said, ‘What do you want from me?’ I said, ‘All I want you to do is shut up.’ And so when she was kneeling on the ground, I put the strap around her neck to strangle her and it broke in half. And then she started violently struggling for about a minute until I pushed ‑ got her onto her back again – and pushed her head back like this and cut her throat.’”

Denyer then demonstrated how he held Natalie Russell’s head back. ”I cut a small cut at first and then she was bleeding. And then I stuck my fingers into her throat … and grabbed her cords and I twisted them.”

The detectives could hardly believe what they were hearing, but somehow managed to contain their abhorrence so that they could prompt him to continue with his confession of horror.

“Why’d you do that?”

“My whole fingers – like, that much of my hand was inside her throat,” Denyer said as he held up his hand, indicating exactly how much of it he had forced into the wound in the schoolgirl’s throat.

“Do you know why you did that?” the detective asked again.

“Stop her from breathing … And then she slowly stopped. She sort of started to faint and then when she was weak, a bit weaker, I grabbed the opportunity of throwing her head back and one big large cut which sort of cut almost her whole head off. And then she slowly died.”

“Why did you kill her?” the shocked detectives asked, just managing to hold themselves back from being physically ill.

“Just same reason as before, just everything came back through my mind again. I kicked her before I left.”

Denyer then told the stunned detectives that he had kicked Natalie Russell’s body to make sure she was dead, slashed her down the side of her face with his knife and left her where she lay. As he walked back the way he had come in, his blood-soaked hands concealed in his pockets, Denyer saw two uniformed officers taking details from the registration sticker on his car, so he turned around and walked home the other way.

At home, he washed his clothes and hid the murder weapon in his backyard. He later picked up Sharon from her work and spent a quiet evening with her at her mother’s place.

The only emotion that Denyer had shown through the entire interview was when he was disgusted to think that the schoolgirl Natalie Russell would offer him sex. Outside of that it was almost as if he were proud of his achievements.

Then Denyer went on to confess to the slaughter of Donna’s cats. He said that he had brought a knife that afternoon with the sole purpose of “cutting Donna’s throat” because he “didn’t like her.” When he found no-one at home after he entered through a window he vented his anger on her cats.

Denyer told the detectives that he had been stalking women in the Frankston area “for years, just waiting for the right time, waiting for that silent alarm to trigger me off. Waiting for the sign.”

“Can you explain why we have women victims?” Detective O’Loughlin asked Denyer.

“I just hate ’em.”

“I beg your pardon?” said O’Loughlin.

“I just hate ’em,” Denyer repeated.

“Those particular girls,” asked O’Loughlin, in reference to Denyer’s victims, ”or women in general?”


It seemed that the only woman on earth that Denyer didn’t hate was his lover Sharon Johnson, who had absolutely no knowledge of his  murderous activities. “Sharon’s not like anyone else I know. I’d never hurt her. She’s a kindred spirit,” Denyer told the detectives.

Paul Charles Denyer was charged with the murders of Elizabeth Stevens, Debbie Fream and Natalie Russell and the attempted murder of Roszsa Toth, which was later changed to the lesser charge of abduction.

At his trial,  on December 15, 1993, before Justice Frank Vincent at the Supreme Court of Victoria, Paul Denyer pleaded guilty to all charges.

The court heard from clinical psychologist Ian Joblin, who had been appointed to examine Denyer in prison while he was awaiting sentence. Mr Joblin told the court that, in his view, Denyer showed no remorse  for his crimes. In fact, he revelled in telling of the murders and seemed as if he got pleasure recounting them. Denyer blamed a number of things that had happened in his life for leading him down the path to serial murder. He said that his hard upbringing, the alleged sexual abuse by his elder brother and his habitual unemployment were the major contributing factors that caused him to murder young girls.

But the psychologist did not accept the excuses. He said that thousands of people in the community lived under similar circumstances and none of them had resorted to serial murder. Mr. Joblin told the court that of all of the adult offenders he had interviewed over the years – and there had been many – not one was even remotely close to the psychology of Paul Charles Denyer.

Mr. Joblin told the hushed court that Paul Denyer was a very rare breed – a killer who murdered at random and without motive – and this made him the most dangerous type of criminal. He said that Denyer had a cruel and demeaning nature. He had exhibited aggressive behavior since childhood and he seemed to be amused by the suffering that he had inflicted.

Mr. Joblin added that Paul Denyer was a sadist whose pleasure and satisfaction after each murder dissipated quickly so that he would again feel the desire to kill. He said that there was no effective treatment for Denyer’s sadistic personality. On December 20, 1993, Justice Vincent sentenced Paul Charles Denyer to three terms of life imprisonment with no fixed non‑parole period. In other words, the Frankston Serial Killer would spend the rest of his life behind bars without ever the possibility of release. Justice Vincent also gave Denyer an additional eight years for the abduction of Roszsa Toth.

Justice Vincent said: “The apprehension you have caused to thousands of women in the community will be felt for a long time. For many, you are the fear that quickens their step as they walk home, or causes a parent to look anxiously at the clock when a child is late.”

Paul Denyer appealed to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria against the severity of his sentence, and on July 29, 1994, he was granted a 30-year non-parole period, the equal highest non-parole period ever imposed in Victoria. The other recipient was triple murderer Ashley Coulston.

The families of Paul Denyer’s victims felt cheated by the Supreme Court’s decision, as they believed that the only possible sentence for Denyer was jail for life, never to be released. It seems that no one would argue with that except the Supreme Court judges. Only time will tell whether the Frankston Serial Killer will ever be allowed back into society.

Paul Denyer suspect in Murder Mystery Sarah MacDiarmid?

September 26, 2004

According to the father of victim Sarah MacDIARMID investigators have probed a house and it´s back yard using a sniffer dog without success.

Mr. MacDiarmid hoped that a TV-documentary would lead to new clues in the disappearance of his daughter Sarah.

Sarah was only 23 when she disappeared from the Kananook railway station on July 11, 1990. Blood stains were found near her Honda Civic, but no body was ever found.

The reward for any information was increased from 75,000 US$ to 1 million this February.

A group of private investigators recently named serial killer and woman hater Paul Denyer and his accomplice Jodi JONES as suspects in the case. JONES, who did from a heroin overdose in 1991 aged 26 once killed a man by trampling his chest with her stilettos.

Denyer is imprisoned for murdering three women in Frankstone during the 90s.

Police rejects those claims and any new clues in the murder mystery.

Serial killer stalks family from jail

September 29, 2004

SERIAL killer Paul Denyer has tracked down his estranged brother and sister-in-law on the other side of the world…A letter sent to the family, who fled Melbourne after death threats from Denyer, exposes a prison security loophole.

David Denyer said from his UK home yesterday he was at a loss to understand how the triple murderer had been able to find them while in maximum-security Barwon Prison.

David questioned how a man who had threatened to kill his wife and children was able to send him a letter from prison.

Denyer sent the hand-written airmail letter to the supermarket where David works in Surrey, south of London.

“Don’t be concerned about how I found your place of employment,” Denyer writes.

“You have nothing to be concerned about. There’s just a few things I wish to say.”

It is understood a third party may have provided contact details.

The sender is listed on the outside of the letter as Paula Denyer.

The Herald Sun has reported on Denyer’s continuing bid to be treated as a woman while inside the Lara men’s prison. In July, he lost a legal battle to wear makeup while in jail.

While the street name is wrong, the letter is addressed to David of Tesco in the Surrey town where he works. The town has only one Tesco store.

Corrections Victoria said that unless it was notified by the recipient of a letter that correspondence from a prisoner was unwanted, inmates could send letters to anyone.

But Corrections Commissioner Kelvin Anderson said no prisoners had access to the internet or to online search engines.

Mr Anderson said the prison governor could inspect letters if it was believed they were threatening or of a harassing nature. ..Crime Victims Support Association president Noel McNamara called for letters to be censored.

“What’s to stop him from writing to the victims’ families?” Mr McNamara asked.

Denyer, 32, murdered three women in a seven-week killing frenzy in bayside suburbs in 1993. He killed Elizabeth Stevens, 18, Debbie Fream, 22, and Natalie Russell, 17.

In the letter to his brother, dated August 19, Denyer apologises to David for sex abuse claims, which he said contributed to the murders.

“I’m sorry about allowing lies to be said about you David,” Denyer writes. “I have looked over my life and do not agree that once believed abuse from you contributed to my actions.”

David said yesterday he had always maintained the claims of childhood abuse were false.

“For a long time it caused a lot of personal pain, a lot of hardship in our family,” he said.

David and his UK-born wife, Julie, fled Australia in 1992 after Denyer cornered her in Frankston and threatened to kill her and their children.

“We left because of Paul; we left because of the harassment we were getting,” Mr Denyer said.

The family returned to Australia for five months last year, when Julie wrote to Denyer, explaining what he had done to his victims and their family.

David’s 19-year-old daughter picked up the letter from the Surrey store where she works with her father on Sunday, but was too afraid to hand it over. The couple’s 13-year-old daughter gave the letter to Julie.

“I shoved it up my jumper and I walked off to the toilet,” Julie said.

“I had to read the letter twice, and I thought ‘Oh, my God, it’s Paul’. We have just been in a daze ever since. We just can’t believe it – it will not go away. It scares me that he’s managed to find out where David works.”

She said her husband had suffered “breakdown after breakdown”.

Serial killer’s family shocked by letter

September 30, 2004

The estranged brother of Melbourne serial killer Paul Denyer was shocked and angry after receiving a letter from the jailed triple murderer at his workplace in Surry, south of London. Denyer is serving a minimum 30 year sentence at Victoria’s maximum security Barwon Prison for stabbing and strangling three young women in a seven week period in 1993 at Frankston in Melbourne’s south-east.

He had previously threatened to kill his brother David’s wife and children and made false allegations that David sexually abused him as a child. David Denyer today said he and his family had moved overseas to get away from his brother and had been shocked to receive the letter.

“First I was numb with shock, it was hard for me to understand,” he told Melbourne radio station 3AW.

“The more I’ve been thinking about it the last 24 hours, the more angry I have been becoming – it’s an insult to us, it really is.”

David Denyer said the system had failed his family and should be changed to make sure prisoners could not contact their victims. ..”It could have been the parents of one of the girls that he killed,” he said.

“We think we should get an apology because that is just not right.

“The law should be changed to stop prisoners from having any contact in any way shape or form with any of their victims or the victims’ families.”

In his letter, Paul Denyer apologised to his brother for alleging that he killed the three women because David had abused him as a child.

David Denyer today described how his brother had threatened his wife, Julie, in a Frankston shopping centre in 1992.

“He stood nose to nose with her and said basically ‘I am going to kill you and kill your kids’,” he said.

The arrival of the letter had shaken his wife, Mr Denyer said.

“She took the letter, went to the bathroom to read it, had to read it twice before she could even come to terms with the fact that she had this letter in her hands that was written by Paul,” he said.

Paul Denyer said he never wanted to hear from his brother again.

“As far as I’m concerned the man doesn’t exist,” he said.

“If he died tomorrow I wouldn’t shed a tear.”

Corrections Commissioner Kelvin Anderson has promised to speak with David Denyer about how the letter made it to his family.

In his letter Denyer says he got his brother’s address from a friend who is a music teacher in London.

Prisoners’ letters are currently scanned but not read before they are sent.

Denyer signed the letter as Paula, the name he has used since he began his bid for a sex change, which was refused in June this year.

Serial killer denied name change to Paula

December 11, 2004

Violent serial killer and transsexual Paul Denyer will be barred from changing his name to Paula under a crackdown on prison security.

All Victorian prisoners will be banned from changing their names for frivolous or improper reasons under tough new laws introduced into Parliament yesterday.

The move comes after Denyer, 32, began moves to change his name by deed poll and be treated as a woman in prison.

Corrections Minister Andre Haermeyer has told Parliament the prisoner had perpetrated heinous crimes on innocent women and was now causing pain to their families with offensive behaviour.

“We will not stand by while a prisoner attempts to flout the law to gain notoriety and, at the same time, cause great offence to victims of crime,” Mr Haermeyer said.

He said yesterday prisoners changing names could create security issues if they were trying to avoid detection or escape monitoring by police after release from prison.

Inmates will only be allowed to change names for legitimate reasons.

These could include prisoners who were assisting police and needed to go into witness protection, female prisoners who were getting divorced or prisoners with numerous aliases listed on the police database.

The Secretary of the Department of Justice will have the right to veto any application for a name change if it is deemed unnecessary or would cause offence to victims.

The legislation will also enable prison authorities to stop or censor prisoners’ mail before it is sent.

The move came after Denyer recently tracked down his estranged brother in the United Kingdom, 12 years after threatening to kill his wife and children.

Denyer, 32, murdered three women in a seven-week frenzy in bayside suburbs in 1993.

His victims were Elizabeth Stevens, 18, Debbie Fream, who was 22 and the mother of a 12-day-old baby, and Natalie Russell, 17.

In June, Denyer caused public outrage when it was revealed he had been assessed in jail on whether he could have a taxpayer-funded sex change.

He was later barred from gender reassignment surgery and in July lost a legal battle to be allowed to wear makeup.

A new section dedicated to Australian Paedophiles

Finally the Victorian State Government  announced a reversal of laws that have allowed paedophiles to remain anonymous behind court suppression orders. It has been a long time coming but WE the public are soon to get what we have always wanted and that is protection and disclosure from the courts so these rock spiders cannot hide any more under ancient suppression orders that these animals hid under like rats, to hide and sneak around and gnaw away at our children undetected and unknown. Without doubt the other states MUST FOLLOW SUIT and change their legislation too! VICTIMS AND THE PUBLIC MUST COME BEFORE THE CRIMINAL

Judges considering suppressing publication of the identity of a sex offender will now have to place the interests of any victims first, followed by the protection of children, families and the general public. The change was about protecting the public rather than “these weak individuals” who prey on our children in the shadows.

Remember this bloke I named the other week? We he was the catalyst for me starting up this new section Sex abuser wins right to suppress his name  NOT HERE he doesn’t PETER VERSI

I have a list on known and convicted paedophiles as long as my arm of these disgusting individuals, that I have been drafting with the help of a few dedicated concerned participants of this site and via a source or two as well. This is a dedicated section on the PAEDOPHILES, on what they did, who they are, and if known, where they live, photo and all!

I have incorporated the site into this one and you will see it at the top in the menu titled Aussie Paedophiles ( trending with Aussie Criminals” of course).

It is a new wordpress address but I am hoping to match it all up when I kick of our own domain.It looks and feels the same as this site.There is also a link on the top menu to get back to here Aussie Criminals.

The idea being you can search at the top menu and in a single click search for these creeps by the following:

  • State by State,
  • The Conviction
  • Whether or not they are a registered sex offender
  • Their status, In jail, on parole, or released
  • Whether or not we have the court transcript
  •   Identifying photo(s)

I am refining the posting format but soon we will have hundreds of these rock spiders on here for anyone to check on.If you have info on someone, email me with details, any newspaper articles and transcripts if known, and of course confirmed images.(I do check this stuff though) and I will put them up!