August 7, 2023 • 23 mins
Joanne Ratcliffe and Kirste Gordon were young, innocent children when they vanished from an Adelaide football stadium in 1973. We delve into the events of that fateful day, looking at the missteps and missed opportunities that could have possibly changed the course of this case.
In the second half of the episode, we turn our focus to Arthur Stanley Brown and Stanley Arthur Hart, known pedophiles who were persons of interest in these unsolved abductions.
Buckle up for a deep dive into the darkest corners of human nature, and join us in this relentless pursuit for justice.
If you or anyone you know, know anything at all, please contact Policelink on 131 444 or call Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.
For a full list or sources including music & sound effects please click here
Click the link above and purchase a 'virtual' coffee to support the show. All donations will go towards creating more content for you.
Alternatively, you can subscribe to the podcast below. Any support is greatly appreciated.
SUBSCRIBE
You can connect with me on Insta & TikTok @bolo.pod or email bolo.pod@icloud.com
If you have a case you'd like me to cover head to my Insta profile or fill in the form here
Music is Forest Lullaby by LESFM Oleksii Kaplunskyi
Missing Persons Organisations:
The Missed Foundation
Leave a Light On Inc
Australian Missing Persons Register
For Support Helplines in Australia go to:
https://www.whiteribbon.org.au/Find-Help/Help-Lines
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Carla (01:43):
On the 25th of August 1973, Les and Kathleen Ratcliffe
were with their children,Joanne and Joanne's brother and
a family friend known as Frank.
Frank isn't his real name.
They were watching theirfavourite team, Norwood, play
Aussie rules on the AdelaideOval in South Australia.
Joanne Ratcliffe was in gradesix at the time.
(02:06):
She wanted to work with animalswhen she grew up and she really
enjoyed sport.
The Ratcliffe's would sit inthe same area of the stands
every time they went to thisstadium, so Joanne knew her way
around.
Sat next to them on this daywas four-year-old Kirste Gordon,
who was at the game with hergrandmother.
Kirste's parents, Greg andChristine, were out of town
(02:30):
visiting friends, and they hadKirste's younger sister with
them.
In an interview with Channel 9News on the eve of Missing
Persons Week in 2017, they spokeabout Kirste.
Greg described her as a verycharming little girl who was
always full of smiles, andChristine said Kirste had a lot
to do, that she had a lot ofpotential, but that it just
(02:54):
wasn't meant to be.
Les and Kathleen Ratcliffe hadone very important rule while at
the football.
It was this none of thechildren were allowed to go to
the toilet at quarter or halftime.
These are the breaks in thegame.
This is when the toilets wouldbe the most busy and likely have
the longest lines.
(03:14):
Nor were they allowed to go atany time in the final quarter,
maybe also because it was toorowdy by then or also too busy.
So when little Kirste needed togo to the toilet in the second
quarter of the game, Joanne,being a responsible and caring
11-year-old, offered to take her.
They walked together the 300metres from the oval to the
(03:35):
women's toilets and returnedsoon after.
They then went to the toiletagain in the third quarter
around 3.45pm, and when theydidn't return within 15 minutes,
the Ratcliffe's and Kirste'sgrandmother started frantically
searching.
Kathleen, Joanne's mum beggedthe game's organisers to make an
(03:57):
announcement over the PA system, but they flat out refused and
told her to call the police ifthe girls hadn't turned up by
the end of the game.
So it wasn't until after 5pm,after the game had ended, when
some people had already left,that she was finally able to
persuade them to announce thatthere were two missing girls.
(04:18):
You can imagine the rush of13,000 people all trying to
escape a stadium at the sametime, and you can imagine the
sheer frustration of Joanne'sparents and Kirsty's grandmother
just watching thousands ofpeople leave and that
helplessness that they must havefelt in that moment of not
(04:39):
knowing where they were.
The girls were reported missingto police at 5.
12 pm, by which time they'd beengone for one and a half hours.
This is one of those cases thatI find infuriating, and I feel
so much for the parents andfamilies because, let's remember
here they aren't the ones atfault.
(05:00):
They did nothing wrong.
They had rules in place to keeptheir children safe.
The children were together,they were 11 and 4, they were in
a familiar place and, as I saidbefore, joanne knew her way
around the stadium.
It was also a different time.
In 1973, australia wasconsidered relatively safe and
(05:21):
despite this, the family stillhad clear rules in place.
They raised the alarm within 15minutes, or tried to, and
Joanne and Kirsty were literallyabducted in plain sight.
I was a child growing up in the70s in Australia.
My parents weren't lax in anyway, but we used to ride 3.5
kilometres alone to primaryschool and back, and then after
(05:44):
school.
Most of the kids in our streetwere out riding their bikes and
playing.
For most families, the rule wasjust be home when the street
lights came on.
It's just how it was.
So, instead of laying blame onthe victims or the victims'
parents, let's blame the personor people responsible, the
perpetrators, they're the onesat fault.
(06:05):
It absolutely made my blood boilwhen I discovered that the two
key persons of interest in thiscase were known pedophiles who
spent years being widely knownas child abusers, free just to
live their lives.
Pray upon children withoutrepercussion.
(06:26):
There's also a good chance.
We wouldn't still be lookingfor the girls if the authorities
had made an announcementearlier that day.
Why didn't the game officialstake Joanne's mother seriously?
Did they not want to interruptthe game?
Did they think she wasoverreacting, or both?
Whatever it was, she wasdismissed by officials When she
(06:47):
clearly knew it was out ofcharacter for Joanne to not
return with Kirste and she knewsomething was terribly wrong.
(07:08):
So what happened when the girlsleft the stadium to go to the
toilets?
Well, there were eyewitnessreports and all confirmed they
saw a middle-aged man who wasthin and tall, wearing a
wide-brimmed hat and a checkedjacket.
He was seen carrying a youngerchild with an older child
following along, trying to grabat him and looking visibly upset
(07:30):
.
One key witness, 13-year-oldAnthony Kilmartin, had noticed
the girls in the stands earlieras he was selling sweets.
He then noticed them againlater with the man.
His description of the manhelped the police with the
identikit photo created.
He told police he saw Joanneyelling and attacking the man as
(07:54):
he was carrying Kirsty.
It was actually Joanne's attackon the man that drew his
attention and likely that of theother witnesses to them.
Joanne did not go quietly.
She did all she could to saveKirste from being taken and in
doing so she helped thewitnesses be able to later
understand what they were seeingand provide a description of
(08:18):
the man.
The last sighting of the girlswas by a 14-year-old called Sue
Laurie.
Sue was coming out fromAdelaide Zoo.
She could see the oval and shesaid she watched for roughly a
minute.
What she saw was a man walkingquickly carrying a young child,
(08:38):
and running behind was a girlwho was punching him as hard as
she could in the back andyelling.
She noticed the hat the man waswearing as being unusual for
men at that time.
Sue said quote "The parents ofJoanne should take heart.
That little girl did everythingshe could to protect her little
friend.
(08:59):
Had these witnesses known at thetime that there were two
missing children, they mighthave been able to stop what
happened or at the very leastalert the authorities.
Instead we learned that thesightings of the girls were
passed off as a father orgrandfather dealing with his
unruly children.
There was a massive searchundertaken at the Oval once
(09:21):
police were notified And a fewdays later, when the story
reached the media, the witnessreports came in and the
investigation began with a$5,000 reward for information.
But despite the reward, thecase went cold pretty quickly.
There was a 1979 coronialinquiry and the findings were
(09:41):
that the girls had been abductedand that investigations were to
continue.
It was around this time as wellthat Sue Laurie, the
14-year-old witness, who was nowin her 20s, put two and two
together and figured out what itwas she saw that day.
She read an article about thegirls' abduction and that
(10:03):
article helped her put it alltogether in her mind, and that's
when she went to police to makea full statement.
Her description of the manmatched up with the other
descriptions given that day ofan older man wearing a hat and a
checked jacket, despite itbeing years since it had
happened, and this makes Sue areally credible witness.
(10:23):
Fast forward to 1998, sue Lauriesees a picture of a man called
Arthur Stanley Brown.
Brown's picture was in themedia because he had just been
arrested and charged inTownsville, which is in
Queensland, for the 1970abduction and murder of two
(10:44):
young sisters, Judith (seven)and Susan (five), which occurred
just three years before Joanneand Kirste went missing.
Sue was looking at this pictureand she thought that this guy,
brown, looked like the guy fromthe Oval all those years ago.
She not only thought it lookedlike him, she thought it was him
.
She was 100% certain this isthe same man and she is still,
(11:10):
50 years later, 100% certainthat Brown was the guy she saw
that day.
So even though Sue and quite afew other sources believe that
Brown is a key suspect for theabduction, police do not.
Brown was charged with murderingthe McKay sisters who were on
their way to school when theywere abducted from a bus stop.
(11:31):
But it wasn't until 1998, whena crime program featured the
1970 murders, that he wasfinally arrested.
His first wife, Hester, died insuspicious circumstances in
their home and then Brownmarried her younger sister, and
(11:52):
when Hester's cousin saw thecrime program about the 1970
McKay sister murders, itprompted her to go to police and
report that Brown had molestedher when she was a child and
multiple other family members,and she told police she had
always suspected him of themurders of the McKay sisters.
(12:13):
Two men in Townsville alsoclaimed Brown had confessed to
the murders to them, and Brownwas also positively identified
by a motorist and a petrolstation attendant who claimed
they saw him with the twosisters in his car that day.
Despite him being charged forthe murders of the McKay
sisters up in Queensland, thetrial resulted in a hung jury
(12:36):
and before his second trialstarted he was declared unfit.
He was also get this grantedbail on 45 other charges
involving alleged offencesagainst six girls aged three to
ten between 1970 and 1977.
(12:56):
These charges included rape,sodomy, deprivation of liberty
and administering drugs.
This piece of shit abuser diedin 2002, a free man, so how good
a suspect is he for theabduction of Joanne and Kirste?
Well, despite Sue Laurie sayingBrown is the guy she saw that
(13:19):
day, and despite him beingcharged with the murders of two
young girls and a string ofsexual assaults in Queensland,
there was no solid evidence ofhim being at the oval that day
in South Australia, althoughit's worth pointing out that he
does look very close to theidentikit image that was
released, and I'll put a pictureof Brown and the identikit
(13:42):
photo up on socials so you cancompare them if you want.
The second key person ofinterest in the case is a man
called Stanley Arthur Hart, notto be confused by Arthur Stanley
Brown.
I mean, what are the chancesthat these two pedophiles yes,
Hart is also a pedophile sharethe same two names back to front
(14:04):
.
Anyway, for clarity, I'll onlybe referring to them now as
Brown and Hart.
So Hart has always been on thepolice radar for the abduction
of Joanne and Kirste.
In fact, he was interviewedjust three days after they went
missing.
Why was he on their radar?
He was another known pedophileand child abuser who owned
(14:27):
several properties in and aroundthe area near where the girls
went missing in South Australia.
To which I say why do we havetwo men and I'm sure there were
plenty more who are, in vertedcommas, known pedophiles?
How is this allowed to happen?
Despite being questioned,nothing came of it until 2009.
(14:48):
By this time, Hart was alreadydead.
He died in 1999.
So 10 years later, Hart'sgrandson, who actually is
currently a convicted pedophilehere in Australia, so they
finally got something right.
His grandson sent a writtenconfession to the police, saying
he was at the Adelaide Ovalthat day with his grandfather
(15:11):
Hart and that his grandfatherwas responsible for the
abduction of the girls.
He says they were taken to thecountry and murdered, and he was
five years old at the time.
But police say this so-calledconfession was questionable.
They say it was full of apedophile's rambling fantasy and
(15:32):
they dismissed its validity.
Or did they?
Because in 2014, police actedupon some information provided
from crime stoppers and actuallyconducted a search and
excavation at one of theproperties where Hart lived in
the mid-north of the state ofSouth Australia.
(16:06):
I'm going to read a section fromthe press conference with
Detective Inspector GregHutchins of the South Australian
Police.
This is not his voice,obviously, but these are his
words.
"This week, we've attendedseveral sites at properties at
Yatna, which is in the mid-northof the state.
(16:27):
We've spent three daysexcavating a well and examining
a second well.
This is in furtherance of anumber of visits to that
location over the past 12 monthsand three previous occasions
where one of the wells has beenexcavated.
We will continue to do anythingwe can to try and find the girls
(16:48):
, find who was responsible fortheir abductions and to date,
our searches at Yatina have notrevealed any evidence in
relation to the girls' abduction.
But we will continue to dowhatever we need to do to try to
find the girls, particularlyfor their families, I can't rule
out that we won't re-attend atthat site because obviously the
(17:09):
person in question is one ofmany people who have been a
person of interest.
His name has come up many timesover the years And we obviously
need to follow every line ofinquiry and try to put it to bed
.
Can we rule out that he'sinvolved?
No, we can't.
Can we rule out that he wasn'tinvolved?
(17:30):
No, we can't, but we will dowhat we need to do to try and
identify who was responsible forthe girls' abduction".
So the search revealed nothingto push the investigation
forward and no evidence of humanremains was found.
(17:51):
So while Hart was a key suspect, he was never formally charged
and, as I said before, he's alsonow dead.
The Australian Channel 9 TVseries Under Investigation
covered the girls' disappearancein an episode called Girls Gone
, which aired just last year, inOctober 2022.
(18:14):
And Bill Hayes, a privateinvestigator on the show, said
he believed there were enoughfacts in the confession given by
Hart's grandson for it to beboth compelling and believable.
So he says yes, it was full oframbling fantasy, but underneath
that and inside that documentthere were facts that he
(18:36):
believes to be true.
So Bill Hayes believes Hart waspart of a pedophile ring and,
as he was living close toKirsty's grandmother's house at
the time of the abduction, hemay have seen them walking to
the game that day.
Bill Hayes believes that thetwo key suspects, brown and Hart
, might actually have had aconnection and may have acted
(18:59):
together Brown abducting thegirls, with Hart the accomplice.
The question still remainstoday Was it Hart or Brown, or
both?
Backing up a bit to 2013,Joanne's sister, Suzie, who was
born after Joanne disappeared,asked the authorities to keep on
(19:23):
the case, and in 2014, a $1million reward was offered by
the South Australian Governmentfor information leading to an
arrest or conviction or recoveryof a body in the murders of 18
children dating back to 1966, ofwhich Joanne and Kirste were
(19:43):
two.
Suzie also appealed to theauthorities to look into Frank,
the family friend who was withthe Ratcliffes at the game that
day.
As far as she was aware, he hadnever been ruled in or out and
we don't know if he was everformally questioned by police,
but Joanne's mother said he lefthis seat for about 30 minutes
before the girls disappeared andthen later stayed in his seat
(20:06):
while everyone else went lookingfor them.
This person, Frank, wasn'tmentioned by Suzie in the 2022
Under Investigation episode, sowhether that was for legal
reasons or whether she'ssatisfied now that Frank is no
longer under suspicion, it's notreally clear.
I approached Suzie to see ifshe would agree to be
(20:28):
interviewed for the podcast, butI hadn't received a reply by
the time this episode went out.
If Suzie does reach out to mein the future, I'll be sure to
include our chat or interview asa bonus episode on the feed.
Joanne's mum and dad have passednot knowing what has happened
(20:49):
to their daughter and sister.
Suzie, Joanne's sister, sayswe're over wanting to know who
did it, how they did it and whythey did it.
We want to be able to layJoanne to rest And Suzie,
inspired by her mum's idea toleave a light on the porch for
Joanne, created an organisationin 2015 called Leave a Light On.
(21:14):
This is from their Facebookpage.
"Leave a Light On aims to raiseawareness of missing persons'
cold cases in Australia.
By working alongside othermissing persons' organisations,
we can promote long-term casesand raise awareness of the need
for ongoing support for familiesand friends dealing with the
(21:34):
ambiguous loss of a missingperson And on the 21st of
October every year, leave aLight On asks all of us, no
matter where we live, to leave alight on in memory of the many
missing persons across Australiaand to brighten their way home.
I'll leave a link in the shownotes for this amazing
organisation so you can checkout the advocacy work Susie does
(21:56):
for families of missing people.
Kirste's parents, Greg andChristine, were also hopeful
that the increased reward wouldhave had the desired effect and
bring some long-awaited answersfor their family.
When they spoke to the media in2017, they said they were
trying to keep the story outthere in the hopes that one day
someone will say I've got to dosomething about this and act on
(22:20):
it.
These families want and deserveanswers to bring their children
home.
Joanne would be 61 now andKirste 54.
If you or anyone you know knowanything at all, please contact
Police Link on 131-444 or callCrime Stoppers on 1800-333-000.
(22:48):
Thanks for listening to BOLO.
If this episode has brought upfeelings for you and you need
support, please reach out toLifeline on 13-11-14 or RESPECT
on 1800-RESPECT.
You can connect with me onInsta @Bolo.
(23:08):
pod or email me Bolo.
pod@ icloud.
com or, if you have a case you'dlike me to cover, I have a form
you can fill in on my Instaprofile.
On the 25th of August 1973, Les and Kathleen Ratcliffe
were with their children,Joanne and Joanne's brother and
a family friend known as Frank.
Frank isn't his real name.
They were watching theirfavourite team, Norwood, play
Aussie rules on the AdelaideOval in South Australia.
Joanne Ratcliffe was in gradesix at the time.
(02:06):
She wanted to work with animalswhen she grew up and she really
enjoyed sport.
The Ratcliffe's would sit inthe same area of the stands
every time they went to thisstadium, so Joanne knew her way
around.
Sat next to them on this daywas four-year-old Kirste Gordon,
who was at the game with hergrandmother.
Kirste's parents, Greg andChristine, were out of town
(02:30):
visiting friends, and they hadKirste's younger sister with
them.
In an interview with Channel 9News on the eve of Missing
Persons Week in 2017, they spokeabout Kirste.
Greg described her as a verycharming little girl who was
always full of smiles, andChristine said Kirste had a lot
to do, that she had a lot ofpotential, but that it just
(02:54):
wasn't meant to be.
Les and Kathleen Ratcliffe hadone very important rule while at
the football.
It was this none of thechildren were allowed to go to
the toilet at quarter or halftime.
These are the breaks in thegame.
This is when the toilets wouldbe the most busy and likely have
the longest lines.
(03:14):
Nor were they allowed to go atany time in the final quarter,
maybe also because it was toorowdy by then or also too busy.
So when little Kirste needed togo to the toilet in the second
quarter of the game, Joanne,being a responsible and caring
11-year-old, offered to take her.
They walked together the 300metres from the oval to the
(03:35):
women's toilets and returnedsoon after.
They then went to the toiletagain in the third quarter
around 3.45pm, and when theydidn't return within 15 minutes,
the Ratcliffe's and Kirste'sgrandmother started frantically
searching.
Kathleen, Joanne's mum beggedthe game's organisers to make an
(03:57):
announcement over the PA system, but they flat out refused and
told her to call the police ifthe girls hadn't turned up by
the end of the game.
So it wasn't until after 5pm,after the game had ended, when
some people had already left,that she was finally able to
persuade them to announce thatthere were two missing girls.
(04:18):
You can imagine the rush of13,000 people all trying to
escape a stadium at the sametime, and you can imagine the
sheer frustration of Joanne'sparents and Kirsty's grandmother
just watching thousands ofpeople leave and that
helplessness that they must havefelt in that moment of not
(04:39):
knowing where they were.
The girls were reported missingto police at 5.
12 pm, by which time they'd beengone for one and a half hours.
This is one of those cases thatI find infuriating, and I feel
so much for the parents andfamilies because, let's remember
here they aren't the ones atfault.
(05:00):
They did nothing wrong.
They had rules in place to keeptheir children safe.
The children were together,they were 11 and 4, they were in
a familiar place and, as I saidbefore, joanne knew her way
around the stadium.
It was also a different time.
In 1973, australia wasconsidered relatively safe and
(05:21):
despite this, the family stillhad clear rules in place.
They raised the alarm within 15minutes, or tried to, and
Joanne and Kirsty were literallyabducted in plain sight.
I was a child growing up in the70s in Australia.
My parents weren't lax in anyway, but we used to ride 3.5
kilometres alone to primaryschool and back, and then after
(05:44):
school.
Most of the kids in our streetwere out riding their bikes and
playing.
For most families, the rule wasjust be home when the street
lights came on.
It's just how it was.
So, instead of laying blame onthe victims or the victims'
parents, let's blame the personor people responsible, the
perpetrators, they're the onesat fault.
(06:05):
It absolutely made my blood boilwhen I discovered that the two
key persons of interest in thiscase were known pedophiles who
spent years being widely knownas child abusers, free just to
live their lives.
Pray upon children withoutrepercussion.
(06:26):
There's also a good chance.
We wouldn't still be lookingfor the girls if the authorities
had made an announcementearlier that day.
Why didn't the game officialstake Joanne's mother seriously?
Did they not want to interruptthe game?
Did they think she wasoverreacting, or both?
Whatever it was, she wasdismissed by officials When she
(06:47):
clearly knew it was out ofcharacter for Joanne to not
return with Kirste and she knewsomething was terribly wrong.
(07:08):
So what happened when the girlsleft the stadium to go to the
toilets?
Well, there were eyewitnessreports and all confirmed they
saw a middle-aged man who wasthin and tall, wearing a
wide-brimmed hat and a checkedjacket.
He was seen carrying a youngerchild with an older child
following along, trying to grabat him and looking visibly upset
(07:30):
.
One key witness, 13-year-oldAnthony Kilmartin, had noticed
the girls in the stands earlieras he was selling sweets.
He then noticed them againlater with the man.
His description of the manhelped the police with the
identikit photo created.
He told police he saw Joanneyelling and attacking the man as
(07:54):
he was carrying Kirsty.
It was actually Joanne's attackon the man that drew his
attention and likely that of theother witnesses to them.
Joanne did not go quietly.
She did all she could to saveKirste from being taken and in
doing so she helped thewitnesses be able to later
understand what they were seeingand provide a description of
(08:18):
the man.
The last sighting of the girlswas by a 14-year-old called Sue
Laurie.
Sue was coming out fromAdelaide Zoo.
She could see the oval and shesaid she watched for roughly a
minute.
What she saw was a man walkingquickly carrying a young child,
(08:38):
and running behind was a girlwho was punching him as hard as
she could in the back andyelling.
She noticed the hat the man waswearing as being unusual for
men at that time.
Sue said quote "The parents ofJoanne should take heart.
That little girl did everythingshe could to protect her little
friend.
(08:59):
Had these witnesses known at thetime that there were two
missing children, they mighthave been able to stop what
happened or at the very leastalert the authorities.
Instead we learned that thesightings of the girls were
passed off as a father orgrandfather dealing with his
unruly children.
There was a massive searchundertaken at the Oval once
(09:21):
police were notified And a fewdays later, when the story
reached the media, the witnessreports came in and the
investigation began with a$5,000 reward for information.
But despite the reward, thecase went cold pretty quickly.
There was a 1979 coronialinquiry and the findings were
(09:41):
that the girls had been abductedand that investigations were to
continue.
It was around this time as wellthat Sue Laurie, the
14-year-old witness, who was nowin her 20s, put two and two
together and figured out what itwas she saw that day.
She read an article about thegirls' abduction and that
(10:03):
article helped her put it alltogether in her mind, and that's
when she went to police to makea full statement.
Her description of the manmatched up with the other
descriptions given that day ofan older man wearing a hat and a
checked jacket, despite itbeing years since it had
happened, and this makes Sue areally credible witness.
(10:23):
Fast forward to 1998, sue Lauriesees a picture of a man called
Arthur Stanley Brown.
Brown's picture was in themedia because he had just been
arrested and charged inTownsville, which is in
Queensland, for the 1970abduction and murder of two
(10:44):
young sisters, Judith (seven)and Susan (five), which occurred
just three years before Joanneand Kirste went missing.
Sue was looking at this pictureand she thought that this guy,
brown, looked like the guy fromthe Oval all those years ago.
She not only thought it lookedlike him, she thought it was him
.
She was 100% certain this isthe same man and she is still,
(11:10):
50 years later, 100% certainthat Brown was the guy she saw
that day.
So even though Sue and quite afew other sources believe that
Brown is a key suspect for theabduction, police do not.
Brown was charged with murderingthe McKay sisters who were on
their way to school when theywere abducted from a bus stop.
(11:31):
But it wasn't until 1998, whena crime program featured the
1970 murders, that he wasfinally arrested.
His first wife, Hester, died insuspicious circumstances in
their home and then Brownmarried her younger sister, and
(11:52):
when Hester's cousin saw thecrime program about the 1970
McKay sister murders, itprompted her to go to police and
report that Brown had molestedher when she was a child and
multiple other family members,and she told police she had
always suspected him of themurders of the McKay sisters.
(12:13):
Two men in Townsville alsoclaimed Brown had confessed to
the murders to them, and Brownwas also positively identified
by a motorist and a petrolstation attendant who claimed
they saw him with the twosisters in his car that day.
Despite him being charged forthe murders of the McKay
sisters up in Queensland, thetrial resulted in a hung jury
(12:36):
and before his second trialstarted he was declared unfit.
He was also get this grantedbail on 45 other charges
involving alleged offencesagainst six girls aged three to
ten between 1970 and 1977.
(12:56):
These charges included rape,sodomy, deprivation of liberty
and administering drugs.
This piece of shit abuser diedin 2002, a free man, so how good
a suspect is he for theabduction of Joanne and Kirste?
Well, despite Sue Laurie sayingBrown is the guy she saw that
(13:19):
day, and despite him beingcharged with the murders of two
young girls and a string ofsexual assaults in Queensland,
there was no solid evidence ofhim being at the oval that day
in South Australia, althoughit's worth pointing out that he
does look very close to theidentikit image that was
released, and I'll put a pictureof Brown and the identikit
(13:42):
photo up on socials so you cancompare them if you want.
The second key person ofinterest in the case is a man
called Stanley Arthur Hart, notto be confused by Arthur Stanley
Brown.
I mean, what are the chancesthat these two pedophiles yes,
Hart is also a pedophile sharethe same two names back to front
(14:04):
.
Anyway, for clarity, I'll onlybe referring to them now as
Brown and Hart.
So Hart has always been on thepolice radar for the abduction
of Joanne and Kirste.
In fact, he was interviewedjust three days after they went
missing.
Why was he on their radar?
He was another known pedophileand child abuser who owned
(14:27):
several properties in and aroundthe area near where the girls
went missing in South Australia.
To which I say why do we havetwo men and I'm sure there were
plenty more who are, in vertedcommas, known pedophiles?
How is this allowed to happen?
Despite being questioned,nothing came of it until 2009.
(14:48):
By this time, Hart was alreadydead.
He died in 1999.
So 10 years later, Hart'sgrandson, who actually is
currently a convicted pedophilehere in Australia, so they
finally got something right.
His grandson sent a writtenconfession to the police, saying
he was at the Adelaide Ovalthat day with his grandfather
(15:11):
Hart and that his grandfatherwas responsible for the
abduction of the girls.
He says they were taken to thecountry and murdered, and he was
five years old at the time.
But police say this so-calledconfession was questionable.
They say it was full of apedophile's rambling fantasy and
(15:32):
they dismissed its validity.
Or did they?
Because in 2014, police actedupon some information provided
from crime stoppers and actuallyconducted a search and
excavation at one of theproperties where Hart lived in
the mid-north of the state ofSouth Australia.
(16:06):
I'm going to read a section fromthe press conference with
Detective Inspector GregHutchins of the South Australian
Police.
This is not his voice,obviously, but these are his
words.
"This week, we've attendedseveral sites at properties at
Yatna, which is in the mid-northof the state.
(16:27):
We've spent three daysexcavating a well and examining
a second well.
This is in furtherance of anumber of visits to that
location over the past 12 monthsand three previous occasions
where one of the wells has beenexcavated.
We will continue to do anythingwe can to try and find the girls
(16:48):
, find who was responsible fortheir abductions and to date,
our searches at Yatina have notrevealed any evidence in
relation to the girls' abduction.
But we will continue to dowhatever we need to do to try to
find the girls, particularlyfor their families, I can't rule
out that we won't re-attend atthat site because obviously the
(17:09):
person in question is one ofmany people who have been a
person of interest.
His name has come up many timesover the years And we obviously
need to follow every line ofinquiry and try to put it to bed
.
Can we rule out that he'sinvolved?
No, we can't.
Can we rule out that he wasn'tinvolved?
(17:30):
No, we can't, but we will dowhat we need to do to try and
identify who was responsible forthe girls' abduction".
So the search revealed nothingto push the investigation
forward and no evidence of humanremains was found.
(17:51):
So while Hart was a key suspect, he was never formally charged
and, as I said before, he's alsonow dead.
The Australian Channel 9 TVseries Under Investigation
covered the girls' disappearancein an episode called Girls Gone
, which aired just last year, inOctober 2022.
(18:14):
And Bill Hayes, a privateinvestigator on the show, said
he believed there were enoughfacts in the confession given by
Hart's grandson for it to beboth compelling and believable.
So he says yes, it was full oframbling fantasy, but underneath
that and inside that documentthere were facts that he
(18:36):
believes to be true.
So Bill Hayes believes Hart waspart of a pedophile ring and,
as he was living close toKirsty's grandmother's house at
the time of the abduction, hemay have seen them walking to
the game that day.
Bill Hayes believes that thetwo key suspects, brown and Hart
, might actually have had aconnection and may have acted
(18:59):
together Brown abducting thegirls, with Hart the accomplice.
The question still remainstoday Was it Hart or Brown, or
both?
Backing up a bit to 2013,Joanne's sister, Suzie, who was
born after Joanne disappeared,asked the authorities to keep on
(19:23):
the case, and in 2014, a $1million reward was offered by
the South Australian Governmentfor information leading to an
arrest or conviction or recoveryof a body in the murders of 18
children dating back to 1966, ofwhich Joanne and Kirste were
(19:43):
two.
Suzie also appealed to theauthorities to look into Frank,
the family friend who was withthe Ratcliffes at the game that
day.
As far as she was aware, he hadnever been ruled in or out and
we don't know if he was everformally questioned by police,
but Joanne's mother said he lefthis seat for about 30 minutes
before the girls disappeared andthen later stayed in his seat
(20:06):
while everyone else went lookingfor them.
This person, Frank, wasn'tmentioned by Suzie in the 2022
Under Investigation episode, sowhether that was for legal
reasons or whether she'ssatisfied now that Frank is no
longer under suspicion, it's notreally clear.
I approached Suzie to see ifshe would agree to be
(20:28):
interviewed for the podcast, butI hadn't received a reply by
the time this episode went out.
If Suzie does reach out to mein the future, I'll be sure to
include our chat or interview asa bonus episode on the feed.
Joanne's mum and dad have passednot knowing what has happened
(20:49):
to their daughter and sister.
Suzie, Joanne's sister, sayswe're over wanting to know who
did it, how they did it and whythey did it.
We want to be able to layJoanne to rest And Suzie,
inspired by her mum's idea toleave a light on the porch for
Joanne, created an organisationin 2015 called Leave a Light On.
(21:14):
This is from their Facebookpage.
"Leave a Light On aims to raiseawareness of missing persons'
cold cases in Australia.
By working alongside othermissing persons' organisations,
we can promote long-term casesand raise awareness of the need
for ongoing support for familiesand friends dealing with the
(21:34):
ambiguous loss of a missingperson And on the 21st of
October every year, leave aLight On asks all of us, no
matter where we live, to leave alight on in memory of the many
missing persons across Australiaand to brighten their way home.
I'll leave a link in the shownotes for this amazing
organisation so you can checkout the advocacy work Susie does
(21:56):
for families of missing people.
Kirste's parents, Greg andChristine, were also hopeful
that the increased reward wouldhave had the desired effect and
bring some long-awaited answersfor their family.
When they spoke to the media in2017, they said they were
trying to keep the story outthere in the hopes that one day
someone will say I've got to dosomething about this and act on
(22:20):
it.
These families want and deserveanswers to bring their children
home.
Joanne would be 61 now andKirste 54.
If you or anyone you know knowanything at all, please contact
Police Link on 131-444 or callCrime Stoppers on 1800-333-000.
(22:48):
Thanks for listening to BOLO.
If this episode has brought upfeelings for you and you need
support, please reach out toLifeline on 13-11-14 or RESPECT
on 1800-RESPECT.
You can connect with me onInsta @Bolo.
(23:08):
pod or email me Bolo.
pod@ icloud.
com or, if you have a case you'dlike me to cover, I have a form
you can fill in on my Instaprofile.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial
Introducing… Aubrey O’Day Diddy’s former protege, television personality, platinum selling music artist, Danity Kane alum Aubrey O’Day joins veteran journalists Amy Robach and TJ Holmes to provide a unique perspective on the trial that has captivated the attention of the nation. Join them throughout the trial as they discuss, debate, and dissect every detail, every aspect of the proceedings. Aubrey will offer her opinions and expertise, as only she is qualified to do given her first-hand knowledge. From her days on Making the Band, as she emerged as the breakout star, the truth of the situation would be the opposite of the glitz and glamour. Listen throughout every minute of the trial, for this exclusive coverage. Amy Robach and TJ Holmes present Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial, an iHeartRadio podcast.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.