Home News Cold Cases, Part 1: Am I the Only Person Who Has Read...

Cold Cases, Part 1: Am I the Only Person Who Has Read Page 232?

30

(Left) Debi Marshall's book Banquet, (Right) Colin Manoc(L) Debi Marshall’s book Banquet (photo penguin.com.au), (R) Colin Manock (photo abc.net.au)

by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

As noted in my 19 July 2023 article, an international one-day conference was held in London on July 16, 2023. It was advertised as an SRA conference: Satanic Ritual Abuse, under the auspices of Jeanette Archer of the UK.  (The speaker from Australia was Rachel Vaughan. She did not speak directly on the topic of satanism, using her 25 minutes instead to report her research into the deaths of abducted children.) The full 7-hour video of the conference is available.

Today’s article will be short. The so-called Family murders, that took place in Adelaide from 1979 to 1983, are not a matter on which I have expertise. On the other hand, I’m not stupid and I can see, as you can see, when something is just way off the mark. This article is written in reaction to page 232 of the book by Debi Marshall entitled Banquet, published in 2021.

The gist of the offending page, 232, is that one person who held an official post in South Australia in the 1970s, Dr Colin Manock, admitted to Debi Marshall that he knew the location of one of the murders. Debi’s response was “Even Major Crime does not know that location.”  Oh? Hmm. They’d know if they would bother to ask the same person Debi asked, to wit, Coli Manock.

Debi Marshall had already researched two relevant documentaries before she wrote Banquet. As she states on page 281, “In 2017 Foxtel commissioned a TV series on two storylines:  the Family murders and the murder of Derrance Stevenson.”

I gave Banquet a five-star review at GumshoeNews.com in 2022. Today I would still give it five stars for excellence of presentation. Ms Marshall went out and found anyone who knew the principles or their buddies, and tape recorded — with their permission — hard-hitting interviews with them. But maybe I should fault her for not printing page 232 in all caps, or for not moving it to page 1.

Here it is, then, for your edification.  Interview of Colin Manock, on page 232 of Banquet:

Debi: You say there were lawyers involved in the Family murders?

Colin: Yes. They were attending meetings to discuss what they were going to do, and participating in whatever was being done. One of the children was drowned, I believe, in a swimming pool in a particular house in the hills. I won’t say whose house it was, but it was a lawyer. The place where I believe the drowning took place is in the basement of the lawyer’s house, and he was obviously involved in what happened in that particular case.

“The body was drowned in this particular swimming pool and it was then taken out and dumped somewhere in hopes that I wouldn’t notice that it was a drowning.” [Note Colin uses the first-person pronoun, I, as he was the relevant coroner.]

Debi: Who was the lawyer?

Colin: I am not going to give you his name.

Debi: Is he a high-ranking lawyer?

Colin: Yes, He’s a QC.

Debi: What?  So you’re saying a QC was involved in the Family murders?

Colin: Yes. He provided the facilities where it happened and was involved in the removal of the body.

Debi: Jesus — are you serious?

Colin: Yes, and he was not the only lawyer who was involved.

Debi: Who else was involved?  You don’t have to name them…

Colin: … They were a tight scrum of people, all involved together….

Debi:  …Were they involved in the abduction of the young men?

Colin: Yes….And carrying out sexual acts on them….

Debi: Were they involved in mutilation of the bodies?

Colin: Um, not particularly, no. [Remember, Colin did the autopsies.]

Debi: Did this group act together?….

Colin: …Well, they’d decide what further involvement would be required….If you’ve got a teenager who died in a swimming pool that’s in the basement of a small property, then you’re gonna need two people, at least to carry the body upstairs and into a waiting car….

Debi: Were they all lawyers?

Colin:  I don’t know. I think the two main people were.

Debi:  Judges?

Colin: Not on this occasion, I don’t think

Debi: This occasion? Are you talking about Barnes?

Colin: Yes. [Alan Barnes, age 16, was abducted while hitchhiking in 1979]

HOLD IT RIGHT THERE, GUYS! The murder of Alan Barnes, an innocent boy, is a cold case at SAPOL.  Here we have a Foxtel journalist interviewing a former coroner, in a restaurant in Adelaide. He clearly shows that he is aware of the location and type of death of Barnes. He also can pin down at least one of the principals, based on whose house it was. This book has been published for over a year.  Why isn’t the South Australian government jumping into action?

Beloved Readers, you may have noticed that this new series has the title “Cold Cases.” Please don’t think I am about to play Sherlock Holmes — I already regret the years of my life that went into some other sleuthing missions. I will not take up the matter of the Family murders in Adelaide. I don’t care about sin.  We all sin.  I care about how the institutions we built to protect us from the consequences of sin are in freefall.

I’ll continue to follow Rachel Vaughan’s work, which sheds light on various topics. And we are all gaining from Diane DeVere’s revelations about Australia being a key experimental zone for Tavistock’s mind control business — whose impact we perhaps saw in the public acceptance of the pandemic narrative, worldwide.

But my concern is narrow. I am interested in the collapse of law. My current interest in the law in Australia is the criminality of the Family Court, with regard to child-trafficking. (Forget immunity, please; it works against lawsuits but not against crime. Only one person in Australia, the monarch, has immunity from criminal charges). A side issue to the Family Court’s criminality is the Russell Pridgeon case, especially the unfair treatment he gets as a whistleblower.  See his new book, Everybody Knows.

We are all in extreme trouble now. Foreign billionaires have replaced government as the deciders of our fate.  And what do these billionaires try to accomplish? I feel sure I ken their main goal — to keep at bay the folks who would hurt them, namely, all of us. Let’s not cushion their endeavors along that line. (Unless you’re really, really into masochism.)

I say wake up, get smart, and stop obeying those idiots. Here is what Adelaide cops, lawyers, clergy, etc, can do right now. Put a “John Doe” on trial (moot court if necessary) for the 1979 murder of Alan Barnes. There is no statute of limitations on the crime of murder.

We want to subpoena Colin Manock as a witness. If he won’t show, ask Ms Debi Marshall for the tape of her interview with him. How could he have known the details of a house with a swimming pool in the basement?  (Local councils probably know who’s got a basement swimming pool.)

If Manock won’t cooperate as a witness, he can be arrested for misprision, a little-known crime that has been on the books for yonks. Misprision.  Rhymes with vision.  It’s the crime of knowing about a felony and not reporting it.

Sure, I realize Colin “couldn’t” report Barnes death, as he would have got bumped off. Sure, I realize government has to give high positions, such as coroner, to people who might sing.  Sure I realize the ruthless and deceitful have got us trapped. Sure, sure, blah, blah, blah.

Ms Debi Marshall has given us Page 232.

There it is, in all its glory.

Use it or lose it.

SHARE

30 COMMENTS

  1. Sorry. The title should say Cold Cases.

    But Agent 77 is out of range, and Al Haig was never given the keys….

    How about, just for the hell of it, comments remain On Topic today.

    Anyone needing an exemption from that, apply in the usual way…. Ta.

  2. The South Australian cases are extremely sophisticated. I think with some cases they create false leads that leads from the real culprits…

    • Ah, I guess spooky is not so spooky. Hi Dee.

      I think you may be hinting that the page 232 story is not genuine. I also have a suspicion about that. Nonetheless, we have a city of people reading in plain sight, that a former coroner knows the dirt but the DPP can’t be bothered to follow up. Last year I asked Debi Marshall to have a chat with me but she said she had moved on to another topic and was immersed in it.

      This book, Banquet, does mention, in passing, Allen ‘Max” McIntyre [who] died in 2017:
      “He was a close friend of Anthony Munro, a former scout master convicted of multiple child sex offenses in Australia between 1965 and 1983. McIntyre’s children, Ruth Collins and Andrew McIntyre, have each claimed, without substantiation, that their father and Muno were responsible for the murder and disappearance of the Beaumont children.” — page 265.

      I said I would give Banquet 5 stars — for presentation. As with the restaurant interview of Colin Manock above, it at least quotes Debi’s (many) interviewees. But I am not rating her honesty. In a comment to my article “One small step for Rachel Vaughan, one giant leap for mankind,” I said I think we got took by the Banquet book.

      I’d be willing to float the idea that there is no lawyer with a basement swimming pool — and that the purpose of that part of the Banquet book — page 232 — is to create a false lead.

      Dee, where are the hundreds of lawyers in Adelaide, or the thousands of lawyers in Australia, who said “Hey look at page 232. Why isn’t the DPP following up on this hot lead about the death of young Barnes?”

      My article today is about that.

  5. Rachel Vaughan said this online in 2017:

    Twice convicted paedophile Anthony Munro is due to be sentenced tomorrow. … In 2007 my sister Ruth Collins made a statement at the SA Major Crime department regarding her witness account of the three Beaumont children, Jane, Aarna and Grant, dead in the boot of a car on the fateful Australia Day that they went missing. In 2015 our father, Allan Maxwell McIntyre told investigative journalist Bryan Littley (on camera) that Anthony Munro took the dead Beaumont children to his Edwardstown home on that Australia day. [1966]

    After 12 years of trying to give a statement to SAPOL regarding his own corroborating witness account of what happened on Australia Day 1966, SAPOL have still not interviewed my brother Andrew McIntyre about this event. The stalling tactics utilised by SAPOL and the major crime department in avoiding giving Andrew his legal right to make a statement about the events of Australia Day 1966 have been unbelievable, and in my opinion, criminal. [Mine too — MM]

    Ruth, Andrew, and I all agree that the major crime department needs a severe overhaul! The police Ombudsman in this state has done little but defame me in my attempts to achieve justice for the children whose murders I was forced to witness in my childhood. Instead, the acting Police Ombudsman chose to mislead the Attorney-General about the validity and substance of my allegations. This acting ombudsman just made it up as he went along! [Shame, shame. And that, too, is criminal. We have a crime called “perversion of the course of justice.” Just ask Russell Pridgeon to hold forth on it! He has been UNDER ARREST for it for 5 years.– MM. Why not arrest the ombudsman?]

  6. This 2012 video came up as a “trending” feature during the night at Gumshoe.
    I think a little gremlin picks out past items from Gumshoe that elaborate on a point made in the curent article. I find it very helpful.

    • https://gumshoenews.com/trish-fotheringham-dissociation-ritual-abuse-and-dr-ellen-lachter/
      Full circle Mary. I select one para and one video relevant to todays topic.
      “I am in a hurry to get to some information provided by Dr Ellen Lachter, so I will just squeeze three of the 5 areas down to one: How the networks avoid punishment, how the “right’ judges get appointed, and why the RC did not welcome current cases, are all the same, I suppose. You can ask Rachel Vaughan. She proved beyond doubt that it is impossible to get SAPOL, the South Australian Police, to arrest a child murderer, if that man is protected by the networks. And Family Court and Childrens’ Court judges will NOT make proper rulings in abuse cases.”

      This paragraph also makes Dee’s post –so on topic—a must watch —this is where we focus our energy our resources our prayers and our voice

      https://twitter.com/i/status/1682806030298750976

      plus -a follow up interview with Trish Fotherington.

      yes Elspeth

      “The chronic, long term failure of the South Australian legal system to ensure that its chief forensic pathologist was suitably qualified to give evidence was a ticking time bomb that is now exposed, with some 400 criminal cases that should be re-opened”

      • our comments in Mary’s Gumshoe article above are well worth reading—2 years on–may the force stay with us

  7. It would appear that there are a number of unresolved issues re the reliability of Coin Manock’s claims:

    “This is the Dr Colin Manock who not only lacked professional ethics; he lacked the qualifications to do his job. This is the Dr Colin Manock who described Kevin Borick KC as his bête noire and this series of articles is a record of the many reasons why, and why Borick has every reason to be proud of that description – whether Manock actually said it or not.

    The chronic, long term failure of the South Australian legal system to ensure that its chief forensic pathologist was suitably qualified to give evidence was a ticking time bomb that is now exposed, with some 400 criminal cases that should be re-opened. That is the largest volume of potential wrongful convictions in a single jurisdiction – due to one pathologist – in history. And Kevin Borick KC was in the thick of it all, witnessing first hand the malpractice, incompetence and lies that allowed it to happen.

    In this two-part series we present his evidence – including some matters in other jurisdictions – that reflect on the criminal justice system failing to make proper use of science.

    For nearly two and a half decades (1968 – 1995) Dr Manock was one of Australia’s leading forensic pathologists. It has been clearly established that during that whole time he was unqualified, incompetent and a liar. Yet in 2017 the High Court of Australia, dealing with an application for special leave to appeal in a case (Van Beelen) involving Dr Manock, stated they would not consider any evidence or argument relating to Dr Manock’s qualifications or his “good faith”.”
    https://wrongfulconvictionsreport.org/2023/02/02/malpractice-incompetence-and-lies-the-manock-curse-part-1/

    https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/latenightlive/the-case-of-the-underqualified-forensic-pathologist/13748792

      • Typical ABC naivete re the cronyism that pervades the entire justice system, but that doesn’t change the fact that taking such a character’s word re ANY law&order issue is like consulting Jeffry Epstein about pimping out teenage girls

  8. Hate to say it, pedophiles control society that’s why they’re making it normal to abuse children through SRA. In California pedos are protected by law, allowing adults to have sex with children!
    Secret societies are the real government, politicians simply puppets. Pedophilia is the tool used to blackmail them, without satanic systems the abuse of children wouldn’t exist.
    Because of pagan ceremonies at the top our Oz is drenched in the blood of innocents.
    Luciferianism is the guts of Freemasonry, the only solution is to cut off the head of the snake. By shutting down their networks prosperity and peace will return because Luciferianism is the core of child abuse.

    • The Jew as Criminal by J. Keller & Hanns Andersen – Colchester Collection

      https://www.colchestercollection.com/titles/J/jew-as-criminal.html

      by J. Keller & Hanns Andersen. The Jew is fundamentally and basically criminal. Crime is, for him, the form of existence inherent in him. He is continuously and inescapably on the attack against the natural laws of order of the Volksgemeinschaft (ethnic community) and the communal life of the various peoples. It is by no means money per se for …

          • 00:26:41 “Hostility towards the Jewish people today is largely, allegedly, anchored in criticism against unjust policies of the Jewish state that was established in 1948. But there’s a problem with this theory: we have nearly 2,000
            years of history in which the continent of Europe—not only Europe, but mostly Europe—was washed in the blood of the Jews time and time again in a succession of expulsions and exiles and bloodbaths. The issue for nearly 2,000 years was not “occupation” of the Jewish people, but the existence of the Jewish people in our midst.”

            00:27:15 “Perhaps the great majority of cases, or the vast, vast, vast majority of cases, when you see a virulent anti-Zionism, that there’s also an antisemitism right behind it.”

            00:27:27 “I think we need to judge contemporary geopolitical hostility towards the Jewish people in light of the long legacy of anti-Judaism and antisemitism that, in many ways, led to the creation of the Jewish homeland in the Middle East. Because how odd is this—that we’ve said, ‘You can’t live in our midst.’ and then finally, they said, “okay,” established a homeland and we then we turn on them again and say, ‘You can’t live there either.’ History tells us this: it doesn’t matter where they are, whether they’re in their Land or out of their
            Land; the nations of the earth still loathe their existence.”

  9. What a nasty slur, you should apologise for your lack of control over your most base instincts. Who can guess what evil lurks in your heart.

  10. The Internationalist interviewed celebrated archaeologist David Wengrow on his book, The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity.

    David Wengrow is a British archaeologist and Professor of Comparative Archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London.

    In this interview, Wengrow debunks Eurocentric notions of “civilisation”, drawing from the findings of his book, and reflects on how archaeology and anthropology can help shape societies today.

    “But then you look at the kinds of societies most often referred to by historians as ‘civilizations’ and they are things like Imperial Rome, the Aztec or Inca Empires, or Ancient Egypt: basically, systems held together by violence, coercion, and almost invariably also the suppression of women. Actually, these societies invented far less than we think because we tend to be blinded by the pyramids and other great monuments. In fact, as we explore in the book, most of the important scientific achievements in areas like maritime navigation, mathematics, metallurgy, the use of plants for medicines and so on all pre-date kingdoms and empires by thousands of years.”

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.