ジェラルド・クロワゼット氏スレ 伍
Polites explained: “If we find the children, then we'll solve the mystery. If we don't find them then
I'll be very happy because at least we tried and the children could be alive and living somewhere else." 7
Drilling began again the next morning, 1 May. Frank Church, an investigator, had found two people who had played in the brickworks as children.
They explained that they used to play in a cellar, which the team was now drilling to try to locate. The drilling found nothing except a second layer of concrete.
On 10 May Polites announced that “...no organic evidence of human remains was found in recent drill samples.” 8 He said that the dig would continue, in approximately two weeks.
There were no human remains, but drilling samples did show that there were two pits. Excavation of the first pit began over the next weeks.
On the weekend of 23-24 June, two cadaver dogs owned by Janet Havey-Crease became agitated and started digging furiously at one side of the pit,
against the wall. The next weekend they were even more excited at the same place. Nothing was found, however.
By the next week the excavation was half completed and no human remains had been discovered. There was then a halt for several weeks.
Digging resumed in early September. The closest the excavation came to finding anything was on 13 September when a 13cm bone was uncovered. Forensic tests established that it wasn't human.
The excavation of the warehouse ended with no human remains discovered. There is no possibility that the Beaumont children were ever buried there.
So how can Croiset's suggestion be explained? There is one possible answer.
The fact is that there has never been the slightest evidence that Croiset knew where the children were buried, if indeed they were.
His interpreter said that Croiset secretly thought the children were buried under a new block of flats on the outskirts of Glenelg,
but that Croiset did not say anything because he didn't want anybody to lose their home. He nominated the warehouse instead as a place that could be easily excavated. This plainly does not make sense.
One rational explanation is that Croiset didn't have any idea where the children were, but didn't wish to reveal himself as a fraud.
He therefore nominated a location which could be excavated without ruining anyone's home, but which would still take time to investigate.
This would give him time to leave the country before he was exposed. He could hardly have imagined that 30 years would pass before a complete excavation took place.
Nor did he appear to know that police had already checked all the building sites in the Glenelg area.
There was no more chance that the children had been buried under a block of flats on the outskirts of Glenelg than there was that they had been buried under the warehouse.
Other False Leads:
I'll be very happy because at least we tried and the children could be alive and living somewhere else." 7
Drilling began again the next morning, 1 May. Frank Church, an investigator, had found two people who had played in the brickworks as children.
They explained that they used to play in a cellar, which the team was now drilling to try to locate. The drilling found nothing except a second layer of concrete.
On 10 May Polites announced that “...no organic evidence of human remains was found in recent drill samples.” 8 He said that the dig would continue, in approximately two weeks.
There were no human remains, but drilling samples did show that there were two pits. Excavation of the first pit began over the next weeks.
On the weekend of 23-24 June, two cadaver dogs owned by Janet Havey-Crease became agitated and started digging furiously at one side of the pit,
against the wall. The next weekend they were even more excited at the same place. Nothing was found, however.
By the next week the excavation was half completed and no human remains had been discovered. There was then a halt for several weeks.
Digging resumed in early September. The closest the excavation came to finding anything was on 13 September when a 13cm bone was uncovered. Forensic tests established that it wasn't human.
The excavation of the warehouse ended with no human remains discovered. There is no possibility that the Beaumont children were ever buried there.
So how can Croiset's suggestion be explained? There is one possible answer.
The fact is that there has never been the slightest evidence that Croiset knew where the children were buried, if indeed they were.
His interpreter said that Croiset secretly thought the children were buried under a new block of flats on the outskirts of Glenelg,
but that Croiset did not say anything because he didn't want anybody to lose their home. He nominated the warehouse instead as a place that could be easily excavated. This plainly does not make sense.
One rational explanation is that Croiset didn't have any idea where the children were, but didn't wish to reveal himself as a fraud.
He therefore nominated a location which could be excavated without ruining anyone's home, but which would still take time to investigate.
This would give him time to leave the country before he was exposed. He could hardly have imagined that 30 years would pass before a complete excavation took place.
Nor did he appear to know that police had already checked all the building sites in the Glenelg area.
There was no more chance that the children had been buried under a block of flats on the outskirts of Glenelg than there was that they had been buried under the warehouse.
Other False Leads:
|
|
|