Karmein Chan and JonBenet Ramsey a Mr Cruel intruder theory

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ATTACK ON KARMEIN CHAN, 13

Mr Cruel’s modus operandi changed dramatically with his next and last known attack on April 13, 1991 — which ended in the death of Presbyterian Ladies College student Karmein Chan.

The most likely reason for the change from kidnapper to killer is that Karmein somehow managed to see Mr Cruel — something he assiduously avoided with other victims through the use of masks and blindfolds.
Karmein Chan was kidnapped from her Templestowe home. Her body was found twelve months later.

He told an earlier victim not to try to look at him, warning the 14-year-old girl in 1987: “My freedom is more important than your life.”

Karmein’s mother Phyllis told police her 13-year-old daughter was not the sort of girl to accept captivity without a fight.

Phyllis Chan believes Karmein may have ripped off her blindfold and confronted Mr Cruel — in effect, signing her death warrant as if he released her after that she could identify him.

Mr Cruel wore a brown balaclava when he broke into the Chan’s luxury Serpells Rd home in prestigious Templestowe about 8.40pm on Saturday, April 13, 1991.

Karmein was babysitting her sisters Karly, 9, and Karen, 7, as her parents John and Phyllis were working in one of the family’s three Chinese restaurants.

Police believe Mr Cruel kept his victims under surveillance for weeks before striking.

He would have known the Chans left Karmein and her sisters home alone while they tended to customers at their popular Ming’s Restaurant in the nearby suburb of Eltham.

The girls were watching TV in Karmein’s room when, during an ad break, Karmein and Karly headed to the kitchen for something to eat.

They were confronted by the knife-wielding Mr Cruel, who grabbed them and forced them back into the bedroom.

Karen, the youngest, had heard the commotion and was hiding behind the door when Mr Cruel entered with her older sisters.

He quickly spotted Karen and made her get into a cupboard with Karly, telling them: “You two little ones get in the cupboard”.

Holding Karmein by the hair, he said she would come back and get them. They never saw her alive again.

Mr Cruel pushed a bed against the cupboard to trap Karly and Karen inside.

They called out to their sister — who was barefoot and wearing only a white, short sleeved, knee-length nightie — as she was dragged from the bedroom.

Sniffer dogs later picked up her scent and followed it to nearby Church Rd, where police believe Mr Cruel had parked his car.

It took Karly and Karen about 10 minutes to free themselves from the cupboard. They phoned their father at the restaurant and told him a man had stolen Karmein.

Mr Cruel left police a red herring at the Chan home in the hope it would lead the investigation away from him.

He spray-painted Mrs Chan’s late model Toyota Camry with the words “More, and more to come” along the driver’s side and “Pay back, Asian Drug Dealer” on the bonnet and front windscreen.

Police spent months sifting through every aspect of Mr Chan’s life to see if the abduction was drug or business-related, rather than the work of Mr Cruel.

They found that Mr Chan was squeaky clean and that the slogans were Mr Cruel’s way of sending police on another wild goose chase.

The then Detective Inspector David Sprague had recently transferred to the rape squad to review the Nicola Lynas kidnapping.

He was the logical person to rouse late on the Saturday night Karmein was taken as there were many similarities between the Lynas and Chan cases — including that both girls were students at the prestigious Presbyterian Ladies College in Burwood, although they didn’t know each other.

Det-Insp Sprague — who rose to the rank of Commander before retiring from Victoria Police — was not impressed by what he found on arriving at the Chan home within hours of the abduction.
Karmein Chan was taken from her Templestowe home in 1991.

“The crime scene was not preserved as it should have been,” he told the Herald Sun in 2003.

“We had a lot of problems with it. Unfortunately, the initial police member in charge had set up the command post inside the house. It was a disaster, with people stomping around all over the place. They didn’t seal the crime scene off as they should have.”

His concern was that evidence that could help identify Mr Cruel might have been destroyed in those first few vital hours.

Det-Insp Sprague, who was appointed to head the Operation Spectrum taskforce set up to catch Mr Cruel, later discovered it was not the first time a chance to identify the notorious kidnapper had been lost.

The taskforce established that Mr Cruel was almost certainly responsible for an earlier series of attacks in Melbourne’s southern suburbs in the early to mid-1980s.

Spectrum detectives wanted to review all the evidence from those cases. They were bitterly disappointed to find some of the evidence had been lost.

Of particular concern was the fact that tape Mr Cruel had used to bind one of his victims was missing.

There have been vast improvements in forensic technology since those attacks in the 1980s, enabling scientists to extract identifying characteristics from the smallest of samples left by an offender.

Mr Cruel’s DNA may well have been on that tape as it is likely he was not as careful during those early attacks as he was with his later victims.

“But we will never know as the exhibit just isn’t there anymore,” the then Commander Sprague told the Herald Sun in 2003.

“In those days police didn’t have the supervision that they do now. With things like exhibits, people would sometimes leave them in their lockers.

“By the time we identified these additional attacks, years after they had taken place, some of those exhibits had been lost and others had simply been thrown out.

“They had never been examined. One exhibit that was lost was tape that one of the victims had been tied up in.

“There were other examples of exhibits that might have been vital to us in identifying the offender not being able to be located when we asked for them.
Detectives believe Mr Cruel may have killed Karmein after she saw his face.
Mr and Mrs Chan plead for Mr Cruel via press conference to return their daughter.

“There were times when we would go looking for the old criminal record sheets, which would record things like the modus operandi of the offender, for incidents we felt might be connected to the man we were after, only to discover those records were missing.

“These things were big hindrances to Operation Spectrum. We were playing catch up all the time.”

But those deadlines passed with no sign of Karmein and no word from Mr Cruel.

Phyllis Chan wrote a letter to Mr Cruel, which was published in the media when Karmein had been missing for nearly 70 hours.

She pleaded with him to return Karmein, saying “in the past you have released the others”.

She said Karly and Karen had started sleepwalking and were calling out for Karmein as they did so.

“The sisters wake up often and peep through the window to see if the man has sent Karmein back,” she wrote in her open letter to Mr Cruel.

The letter also contained a secret code which only Karmein would be able to break.

Mrs Chan said breaking the code would reveal the number of a Post Office box where she was prepared to leave ransom money.

Mrs Chan swore to Mr Cruel that police knew nothing about her attempt to pay to get her daughter back alive. She was telling the truth.

Karly and Karen also wrote letters to Karmein and Mr Cruel, with Karly saying: “Whoever has my sister, I would like her back because then she can help me with my homework and also take good care of my little sister and me.”
Karmein’s sisters Karly and Karen wrote her letters, hoping for her safe return.

But their tormentor ignored these emotive pleas and as the days turned into weeks, and the weeks into months, the climate of fear which had struck Melbourne slowly dissipated as news of Mr Cruel dried up.

That all changed on April 9, 1992 — just four days short of the first anniversary of Karmein’s abduction — when a man walking his dog along Edgars Creek in Thomastown spotted what looked like a human skull in a landfill area.

Bulldozers had recently been at work in the area at the rear of an electricity substation on the intersection of Mahoneys Rd and High St.

The man wasn’t sure it was a skull so he walked over and touched it before going to his nearby home. He told his mother then called Thomastown police.

The site was sealed off and the painstaking task of exhuming the human remains began.

It took 24 hours to recover what was left of the badly decomposed body. It was taken to the Coroner’s Court for forensic testing to establish identity.

DNA and dental records confirmed what police and the Chans feared — it was Karmein.

Examination of the skull revealed she had been shot at least three times in the back of the head.

Operation Spectrum detectives, already working long hours, were swamped with information from a shocked public after news of Karmein’s murder broke.

But none of it helped identify Mr Cruel.

Spectrum detective Steve Fontana, who is now a Victoria Police assistant commissioner, told the Herald Sun in 2001 Mr Cruel’s crimes were very much premeditated.

“He wore a balaclava, always wore gloves, he always made sure the girls were blindfolded the whole time,” he said.

Mr Fontana, who was deputy head of Operation Spectrum from the start and later took over from Det-Insp Sprague as chief after he accepted promotion to become officer-in-charge of detective training in Victoria, said it was very difficult to commit such despicable crimes without leaving physical evidence — yet Mr Cruel managed it.

“You have to give it a lot of thought. He’s gone to great lengths to conceal his identity and that has been maintained for the duration of those girls being held captive,” Mr Fontana told the Herald Sun in 2001.

ref http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/victoria-police-and-fbi-dossier-on-shocking-mr-cruel-child-attacks/news-story/4aa009a7026f137965adf7ac43b0cedc

Mr. Ramsey,

Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We do respect your bussiness [sic] but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession [sic]. She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.

You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a [sic] earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter.

Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart [sic] us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.

You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours. It is up to you now John!

Victory!

S.B.T.C

Mr Cruel wore a brown balaclava when he broke into the Chan’s luxury Serpells Rd home in prestigious Templestowe about 8.40pm on Saturday, April 13, 1991.

Karmein was babysitting her sisters Karly, 9, and Karen, 7, as her parents John and Phyllis were working in one of the family’s three Chinese restaurants.

You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult

Police believe Mr Cruel kept his victims under surveillance for weeks before striking.

You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities.

The letter also contained a secret code which only Karmein would be able to break.

Mrs Chan said breaking the code would reveal the number of a Post Office box where she was prepared to leave ransom money.

Mrs Chan swore to Mr Cruel that police knew nothing about her attempt to pay to get her daughter back alive. She was telling the truth.

she is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.

You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills.

Victory!

S.B.T.C

Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial.

But their tormentor ignored these emotive pleas and as the days turned into weeks, and the weeks into months, the climate of fear which had struck Melbourne slowly dissipated as news of Mr Cruel dried up.

That all changed on April 9, 1992 — just four days short of the first anniversary of Karmein’s abduction — when a man walking his dog along Edgars Creek in Thomastown spotted what looked like a human skull in a landfill area.

Bulldozers had recently been at work in the area at the rear of an electricity substation on the intersection of Mahoneys Rd and High St.

The man wasn’t sure it was a skull so he walked over and touched it before going to his nearby home. He told his mother then called Thomastown police.

The site was sealed off and the painstaking task of exhuming the human remains began.

It took 24 hours to recover what was left of the badly decomposed body. It was taken to the Coroner’s Court for forensic testing to establish identity.

DNA and dental records confirmed what police and the Chans feared — it was Karmein.

Examination of the skull revealed she had been shot at least three times in the back of the head.

e spray-painted Mrs Chan’s late model Toyota Camry with the words “More, and more to come” along the driver’s side and “Pay back, Asian Drug Dealer” on the bonnet and front windscreen.

Police spent months sifting through every aspect of Mr Chan’s life to see if the abduction was drug or business-related, rather than the work of Mr Cruel.

They found that Mr Chan was squeaky clean and that the slogans were Mr Cruel’s way of sending police on another wild goose chase

Mr Cruel left police a red herring at the Chan home in the hope it would lead the investigation away from him.

Mr Cruel wore a brown balaclava when he broke into the Chan’s luxury Serpells Rd home in prestigious Templestowe about 8.40pm on Saturday, April 13, 1991.

Karmein was babysitting her sisters Karly, 9, and Karen, 7, as her parents John and Phyllis were working in one of the family’s three Chinese restaurants.

He would have known the Chans left Karmein and her sisters home alone while they tended to customers at their popular Ming’s Restaurant in the nearby suburb of Eltham.

“The crime scene was not preserved as it should have been,” he told the Herald Sun in 2003.

“We had a lot of problems with it. Unfortunately, the initial police member in charge had set up the command post inside the house. It was a disaster, with people stomping around all over the place. They didn’t seal the crime scene off as they should have.”

His concern was that evidence that could help identify Mr Cruel might have been destroyed in those first few vital hours.

There is evidence that Mr Cruel closely followed news reports, discussing them with his captives.

The letter also contained a secret code which only Karmein would be able to break.

Mrs Chan said breaking the code would reveal the number of a Post Office box where she was prepared to leave ransom money.

When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a [sic] earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter

Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial.

Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded.

That all changed on April 9, 1992 — just four days short of the first anniversary of Karmein’s abduction — when a man walking his dog along Edgars Creek in Thomastown spotted what looked like a human skull in a landfill area.

The man wasn’t sure it was a skull so he walked over and touched it before going to his nearby home. He told his mother then called Thomastown police.

The site was sealed off and the painstaking task of exhuming the human remains began.

It took 24 hours to recover what was left of the badly decomposed body. It was taken to the Coroner’s Court for forensic testing to establish identity.

DNA and dental records confirmed what police and the Chans feared — it was Karmein.

Examination of the skull revealed she had been shot at least three times in the back of the head.

Spectrum detective Steve Fontana, who is now a Victoria Police assistant commissioner, told the Herald Sun in 2001 Mr Cruel’s crimes were very much premeditated.

“He wore a balaclava, always wore gloves, he always made sure the girls were blindfolded the whole time,” he said.

Of particular concern was the fact that tape Mr Cruel had used to bind one of his victims was missing.

Mr Cruel’s DNA may well have been on that tape as it is likely he was not as careful during those early attacks as he was with his later victims.

So he would have seen the haunting television footage of Phyllis Chan weeping over the loss of her daughter and pleading with Mr Cruel during a press conference for him to return Karmein alive.

Serial predators like Mr Cruel don’t usually stop offending until they are caught or die.

Yet there is no evidence that Mr Cruel has stepped out of line since he killed Karmein Chan in 1991.