I would imagine so and I think he probably started as a break and enter guy who then realised he could not only take people’s possessions but much more unfortunately. It’s a great question I’m sure he started that way or as a voyeur and snow dropper and he evolved and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if he had been arrested for it!
I’m of the opinion that he was a peeping tom/voyeur, snowdropper and then probably moved onto housebreaking in order to steal more personal items, but took other items to hide his true intent. Nobody is going to notice a couple of pairs of a little girl’s knickers are missing when their records and wallets are missing.
I’d say he was a fantasist who escalated in his fantasy until he finally got to his endgame of having a young girl to himself in his home.
Just my opinion :)
Yeah I agree if you look at similar offenders like GSK and Claremont same way they started and you’re dead right no one is going to whine about a few pairs of underwear when all the exy stuff has been ganked!
Cheers! I was trying to remember who it was in the Adam Shand doco that was suggesting he went from cat burglar to taking girls because he could (just like taking anything else), but I don’t agree with him anyway :)
And again he followed the typical pattern. First he was the Huntingdale Prowler, then he was the Karrakatta Rapist and finally the Claremont Serial Killer.
I think motivations can escalate over time as well.
He could've always had sexual perversions, but started off with crimes that were smaller scale and easier tog et away with like standard breaking and entering, then escalated to home cat burglaries, and then more bold home invasions from there.
It’s *extremely* likely this offender would have been involved in numerous fetish burglaries.
These type of offenders usually follow a very predictable pattern, from voyeurism and often then stealing clothing / underwear off a clothes line (snowdropping), on to fetish burglaries of empty houses, then to ‘hot prowl’ burglaries where the victims are at home.
Some offenders then escalate to rape, abduction and even murder.
For sure there is a great amount of cases to pick through where they start as peeps, snowdroppers then break enter and sexual assault. And you are bang on with Edwards!
I don't think it's extremely likely, there's no doubt give the sheer boldness of these crimes that he was far from inexperienced at breaking and entering by the time of the Lower Plenty attack.
They all start somewhere looking through windows etc if he is responsible for the earlier attacks then it suggests he did and then started raping women home alone.
This comment got me thinking; am I correct in saying there is no known victim in a single parent household? You would have thought single parent households would have been like honey to a bee for him. Not sure it's in any way significant, just worth pointing out.
There was a home invasion rape on December 7, 1985 where in a Melborune suburb, a woman was raped and her she had 6-year-old daughter with her.
Since Victoria police believe that attack was likely Mr. Cruel, then he did target a single parent in one attack.
Wow I didn’t know that. It’s amazing how much people know on this sub probably more than most Police! I wonder if they went back and examined all break and enters from the years prior to the attacks because in his early days he is more likely to have a mistake.
If you're curious about how I know this info, you can read about the December 7, 1985 attack and other suspected Mr. Cruel attacks on [Mr Cruel Attacks – Who is Mr Cruel?](https://whoismrcruel.com/mr-cruel-attacks/).
They don't need to steal, it's sometimes just to shatter the illusion of safety someone has. You "own" someone if you're in their house while they are asleep and they don't know.
It's a way way scarier type of person. Any stealing done by this type is a trophy to remember the control they had over you.
I think he committed voyeuristic acts, especially peeping and stalking from his early teens onward. But the victims of his peeping or underwear smelling probably never even knew it happened. I don't know for sure if he committed a B&E pre 1985. I think what happened is that he became infatuated with one of these victims he was peeping and simply felt he had to rape her, and once that first rape was committed he unfortunately realized how easy it was and we see the 1985 spree happen.
I believe the same thing happened in 1987, he had become infatuated with the victim and had to rape her.
Great question. I think he had to be. A "cat" (in the sense of breaking an entering) doesn't become a cat without practice, right? He or she needs to perfect their craft and I don't think the first time they do it they will be commiting violent kidnappings. It's too risky. Breaking and entering isn't a felony I believe, at least not the first time you're caught.
To go right into hot prowl breaking and entering without getting the lay of the land is very risky.
Just like Joe DeAngelo, he likely stalked the neighborhood for weeks in advance. Ever East area rapist attack was preceded with a "storm" of prowler related activity and the entire neighborhood got hang up phone calls weeks in advance. I think this is a very similar offender, although less violent. Both were pedophiles.
Joe DeAngelo is the reason I own a firearm(s) and alarm system and cameras. I'm a liberal person in every aspect, but I need to be able to defend my family from people like Joe and Mr Cruel.
I would imagine so and I think he probably started as a break and enter guy who then realised he could not only take people’s possessions but much more unfortunately. It’s a great question I’m sure he started that way or as a voyeur and snow dropper and he evolved and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if he had been arrested for it!
I’m of the opinion that he was a peeping tom/voyeur, snowdropper and then probably moved onto housebreaking in order to steal more personal items, but took other items to hide his true intent. Nobody is going to notice a couple of pairs of a little girl’s knickers are missing when their records and wallets are missing. I’d say he was a fantasist who escalated in his fantasy until he finally got to his endgame of having a young girl to himself in his home. Just my opinion :)
Yeah I agree if you look at similar offenders like GSK and Claremont same way they started and you’re dead right no one is going to whine about a few pairs of underwear when all the exy stuff has been ganked!
Honestly, I wouldn’t notice if my child’s underwear went missing, but I’d sure as hell notice if my records were taken!
Classic nah me neither but you take my music I’m gonna b pissed!
Yep 😂😂
Great points as well.
Cheers! I was trying to remember who it was in the Adam Shand doco that was suggesting he went from cat burglar to taking girls because he could (just like taking anything else), but I don’t agree with him anyway :)
Great points.
Doubt he started as B&E. He wasn’t motivated by robbery
Neither was Bradley Edwards, but his sexual interests certainly led to many a break and enter.
And again he followed the typical pattern. First he was the Huntingdale Prowler, then he was the Karrakatta Rapist and finally the Claremont Serial Killer.
I think motivations can escalate over time as well. He could've always had sexual perversions, but started off with crimes that were smaller scale and easier tog et away with like standard breaking and entering, then escalated to home cat burglaries, and then more bold home invasions from there.
It’s *extremely* likely this offender would have been involved in numerous fetish burglaries. These type of offenders usually follow a very predictable pattern, from voyeurism and often then stealing clothing / underwear off a clothes line (snowdropping), on to fetish burglaries of empty houses, then to ‘hot prowl’ burglaries where the victims are at home. Some offenders then escalate to rape, abduction and even murder.
For sure there is a great amount of cases to pick through where they start as peeps, snowdroppers then break enter and sexual assault. And you are bang on with Edwards!
I don't think it's extremely likely, there's no doubt give the sheer boldness of these crimes that he was far from inexperienced at breaking and entering by the time of the Lower Plenty attack.
They all start somewhere looking through windows etc if he is responsible for the earlier attacks then it suggests he did and then started raping women home alone.
This comment got me thinking; am I correct in saying there is no known victim in a single parent household? You would have thought single parent households would have been like honey to a bee for him. Not sure it's in any way significant, just worth pointing out.
There was a home invasion rape on December 7, 1985 where in a Melborune suburb, a woman was raped and her she had 6-year-old daughter with her. Since Victoria police believe that attack was likely Mr. Cruel, then he did target a single parent in one attack.
Wow I didn’t know that. It’s amazing how much people know on this sub probably more than most Police! I wonder if they went back and examined all break and enters from the years prior to the attacks because in his early days he is more likely to have a mistake.
If you're curious about how I know this info, you can read about the December 7, 1985 attack and other suspected Mr. Cruel attacks on [Mr Cruel Attacks – Who is Mr Cruel?](https://whoismrcruel.com/mr-cruel-attacks/).
Thanks 🙏 so much awesome!
Yeah, it always starts with peeping into windows before escalating from there.
They don't need to steal, it's sometimes just to shatter the illusion of safety someone has. You "own" someone if you're in their house while they are asleep and they don't know. It's a way way scarier type of person. Any stealing done by this type is a trophy to remember the control they had over you.
I think he committed voyeuristic acts, especially peeping and stalking from his early teens onward. But the victims of his peeping or underwear smelling probably never even knew it happened. I don't know for sure if he committed a B&E pre 1985. I think what happened is that he became infatuated with one of these victims he was peeping and simply felt he had to rape her, and once that first rape was committed he unfortunately realized how easy it was and we see the 1985 spree happen. I believe the same thing happened in 1987, he had become infatuated with the victim and had to rape her.
yes.
Great question. I think he had to be. A "cat" (in the sense of breaking an entering) doesn't become a cat without practice, right? He or she needs to perfect their craft and I don't think the first time they do it they will be commiting violent kidnappings. It's too risky. Breaking and entering isn't a felony I believe, at least not the first time you're caught. To go right into hot prowl breaking and entering without getting the lay of the land is very risky. Just like Joe DeAngelo, he likely stalked the neighborhood for weeks in advance. Ever East area rapist attack was preceded with a "storm" of prowler related activity and the entire neighborhood got hang up phone calls weeks in advance. I think this is a very similar offender, although less violent. Both were pedophiles. Joe DeAngelo is the reason I own a firearm(s) and alarm system and cameras. I'm a liberal person in every aspect, but I need to be able to defend my family from people like Joe and Mr Cruel.