Talk:Mr Cruel

earlier converstions

he is a sicko —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ryan762 (talk • contribs) .

Wow what's the chance? I checked this out no less than 6 hours ago and it was only the first 2 paragraphs, then I check in the morning and it's got a whole page added onto it.

Must've been my subconcious when I was sleeping, :P —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.7.176.131 (talk • contribs) .

Copyright violation

I removed the "More Info" section, as it was a direct copy of material from Australian News. The copyright statement says "Copyright © MAKO 2005. All Rights Reserved. You may not republish, distribute, prepare derivative works, or otherwise use the content other than as explicitly permitted herein." — Johan the Ghost _seance 20:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Added more info

Hi,

I added more info today and added the source from which I got it. I changed the formatting to be more in line with my other paedophile additions. Feel free to update - we don't have all his attacks here. This guy is sick, but he's highly intelligent and organized.

I propose that the page be moved to 'Mr Cruel', without the period. I'd prefer 'Mister Cruel' to 'Mr.' - Richardcavell 14:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

---

there's no mention of the blunder where a childhood photo of Karmein Chan was released to the media rather than a current (for 1991) photo (i remember seeing it plastered everywhere including the Herald Sun and The Age). PMA 09:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

"They do have a prime suspect, against whom they have insufficient evidence to prosecute." _Source?

Serial Killer

The article says he killed 1 person, yet he's listed in the serial killer category. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.32.244.191 (talk) 00:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the category. -- Longhair\^talk 08:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hampton?

Does anyone know why Mr Cruel was originally known as the Hampton Rapist? None of the attacks mentioned in this article took place in Hampton? Barneywhiz (talk) 08:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The article on Wikipedea is largely wrong. As a once detective on the task force that hunted Mr Cruel, he was never the 'Hampton Rapist'. Nor did he tell his victim he was going to 'release her in 50 hours'. Nonsense. Nor did he wipe a bench top surface of fingerprints; that's an assumption, at best. The comment on what he did on the bathroom floor is fiction. If you want fuller, more accurate details Wikipedea, contact me for a blurb, after you verify my bona fides. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.171.252.244 (talk) 08:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I have added the "Citation needed" tag to the dubious facts you mentioned. Wikipedia is open to anyone to edit. If you can improve the existing article, please do so, bearing in mind that all facts should be verifyable as per Wikipedia guidelines. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 03:19, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I request this tag be removed, as the Herald Sun(and it's two predecessors), which likely gave him that nickname and is Melbourne's current widest read newspaper, has continually stated since the early days of this investigation that they believed the first rape actually occurred in Hampton in 1985. Today, 9/4/2016, they printed an article that stated the police's current Prime Suspect(who had previously committed crimes against children) actually resided in that suburb at the time(the article I have referenced). A young girl was raped in Hampton in 1985, and later released by her rapist near the Moorabbin Town hall and AMF bowling centre on Nepean Highway in circumstances that mirrored some aspects of Mr Cruel's modus operandi. They have repeated this belief as recently as in their article of today(9 April 2016) showing that they still believe that the Hampton rape was actually the first. This is the reputable source of that nickname. Colliric (talk) 07:11, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

This tag is to remain. "Hampton Rapist" to be removed. Firstly, police have "confirmed" that the 1987, 1988 and 1990 attacks are the same offender. Police "believe" that the 1991 abduction and murder is the offender. Police "speculate" that the February 1985 attack in Hampton may be the offender. Secondly, the Herald Sun article in April 2016 nominated a prime suspect. This was controversial in August 2003 when the Herald Sun made this same claim, based on 1 detective's view, which resulted in another detective contacting the media to dispute there was a prime suspect. According to the April 2016 article this suspect, one of seven, did reside in the suburb of Hampton in the early 1970s and committed attacks between 1972 and 1974 and was released after serving 10 years imprisonment. Thirdly, most importantly you have not provided any evidence of the use of "Hampton Rapist" by either the media or police for these 1987-1991 offences. The predecessor of the Herald Sun, the Sun, came up with the moniker of "Mr Cruel" in 1987 with police believing that various similar attacks were the same offender. 1 of these attacks was the Lower Plenty attack in 1987. The media went on using this moniker and at times using "Mr Cool" which goes back to the police statement to the media in 1987 of "super cool and super cruel". The Age newspaper in April 2001 reported that the police themselves used the moniker "Hampton Rapist" for the February 1985 14 year old girl attack in Hampton and for attacks in "Caulfield, Hawthorn, Brighton, Dingley and Donvale" with no other details such as dates, ages or gender. No media reports have ever contained specific details on all the offences police "speculate" prior to 1987. Melbguy05 (talk) 20:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

30,000 homes?

If you searched 10 houses a day, every day, for 8 years it would still not reach 30,000. Exaggeration? --218.215.50.85 (talk) 10:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

If 20 detectives each searched 10 houses per day it would take 6 months. Exaggeration is not required. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 02:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Karmein Chan

It is not confirmed that Karmein Chain was a victim of Mr. Cruel. He is the prime suspect. Detectives were already investigating the abductions in 1988 and 1990 together with the home invasion in 1987. It was assumed it was the same offender when the abduction occurred in April 1991.Melbguy05 (talk) 23:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 15 November 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 15:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

---

Mr. Cruel → Mr Cruel – In Australian English spelling, in common with most Commonwealth varieties, the full-stop is rarely used after Mr. This is evidenced by press coverage of the case AusLondonder (talk) 22:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. JudgeRM (talk to me) 04:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

• Support Not sure it's true "most" Commonwealth countries use "Mr"- I live in a Commonwealth country and we use "Mr." But "Mr Cruel" is how it is used in the current article sources and other sources about the Australian offender (there is apparently an American Mr. Cruel now). That, and it was moved without discussion in the first place. Ribbet32 (talk) 20:21, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose It is a moniker not a name. The use of . is better. The original newspaper article in 1987 was " Police hunt for Mr. "Cruel" ".--Melbguy05 (talk) 18:16, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support Most cited sources use 'Mr', and that is idiomatic to the national variation of English applicable to the nation this article is about. Given that it was moved without discussion in a manner contrary to WP:ENGVAR, I'm not sure it even needs a discussion. TSP (talk) 16:50, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support - Recent Australian sources don't use the full stop: News.com.au, The Australian, NT News, Aussie's ABC. Someday, maybe American English can no longer use full stop on most abbreviations. George Ho (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Mr." vs "Mr"

As per the closed discussion regarding this article's page name, I've changed all mentions of "Mr." to "Mr" in the interest of consistency. Matuko (talk) 08:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Mr Cruel earlier cases (moved from User talk)

Hello Jabberjaw, in relation to your edit "By January 2017, however, the Casefile podcast have directly stated that "an overall total is given as six crimes" I fail to see whatever Casefile states has any significance at all. In your edit summary you stated "the police interview was in 2001, and the podcast was 2017, and I am sure a lot has changed in that time). Unless, you can substantiate a lot has changed I will remove your addition and revert to previous. Regards Melbguy05 (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, here is the Earlier crimes section in question (minus refs), to provide context to readers here:

• The police have never released specific details of suspected attacks. However, there have been varying reports by the media of suspected earlier attacks prior to 1987.<ref><ref><ref><ref> In a 2001 interview, a decade after the attacks, Detective Stephen Fontana answered a journalist's question on earlier attacks "that there just wasn't enough known about him and he didn't want to speculate".&kt;ref> By January 2017, however, the Casefile podcast have directly stated that "an overall total is given as six crimes".<ref>

Thank you for expressing your concerns. To address the matter, I will re-listen to the 2017 podcast to get a clearer picture of the reference, then I`ll come back with more detail. Until then, I'll also assume you have listened to it too (given that you seem to have a strong, though unclear to me at least, reason for rejecting it as a reliable secondary source). All other sources used in this section are at least 15 years old (except this one from 9 April 2012, which mentions ""POLICE suspect Mr Cruel was responsible for at least a dozen sickening attacks on children over a 10-year period.", which could be another way to update this section). Thanks again. JabberJaw (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

While checking, I have found other useful sources that could also be used:

• PM - 14 December 2010 - "Victoria Police say there are significant new leads and new suspects. But police won't say what their new information is, and they're playing down the prospect of any breakthrough. It is believed that at least four victims are linked to the case."
• Herald Sun, 9 April 2012 "He remains one of our most wanted predators, with attacks on up to 12 children and the horrific murder of at least one victim, 13-year-old Karmein Chan."
• News.com.au 8 March 2016 - "Police have always suspected he was to blame for other attacks, possibly up to a dozen including rape, over a decade."
• Thinking Sideways Podcast 15 June 2017 - "Over the span of 3 years, Mr. Cruel is credited with 4 pedophilic attacks on young girls. Dozens more attacks are loosely connected to him, so why hasn’t he been caught? His meticulous planning and total lack of forensic evidence." Also, from 2:44 timestamp, "The police actually think that Mr Cruel is linked to another dozen or so attacks on children in the area"

JabberJaw (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, as to the source in question, after a intro/conclusion check:

• Timestamp 57:18 - The narrator quoting former Spectrum chief David Sprague from the 8 April 2016 Herald Sun from "when Operation Spectrum first identified that Mr Cruel was almost certainly responsible for an earlier series of attacks in Melbourne"

JabberJaw (talk) 02:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jabberjaw: This section did not need updating it was fine as it was. The media since 1991 has published articles stating differing numbers of suspected prior attacks and stated various individual attacks not directly quoting but attributed to "police believe" or "detectives believe" sources. Victoria Police has never released an official statement or made an official briefing on prior suspected attacks. Stephen Fontana then a serving officer responded "that there just wasn't enough known about him and he didn't want to speculate" in 2001 and nothing has changed. Referring to Casefile podcast, David Sprague never said that in the 8 April 2016 Herald Sun article so Casefile Podcast's reliability is in question, it is stated that "..certainly responsible for an earlier series of attacks.." without quoting a person. The PM - 14 December 2010, refers to the known 4 attacks not prior attacks. Herald Sun, 9 April 2012, is not consistent with 8 April 2016 Herald Sun article stating "attacks on up to 12 children" with 8 April 2016 stating "at least 12 attacks on children" one using "up to" and the other "at least" again not attributed to a source. News.com.au 8 March 2016 - is Herald Sun again now stating "possibly up to a dozen" not consistent with their other articles now using "possibly" and not "at least" or "up to". Thinking Sideways Podcast 15 June 2017, is another poor source like Casefile podcast, both rehashes of secondary sources, with the Herald Sun the source for Thinking Sideways Podcast. Not mentioned in your reply - Herald Sun 11 April 2012 - states "Police refuse to give details of most of Mr Cruel's victims - or when the attacks started." but then in the same article absurdly states "POLICE suspect Mr Cruel was responsible for at least a dozen sickening attacks on children over a 10-year period.". The previous wording before you changed it "There have been varying reports by the media of suspected earlier attacks prior to 1987" was fine and also, "The police have never released specific details of suspected attacks" your edit should be reverted. Regards, Melbguy05 (talk) 05:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy

Hello again. Before I can respond to the assertions above, I have deeper concerns that you are actually an experienced Wikipedia user shadow-editing via an IP address. In my experience, IP address editors I meet are normally linked to vandalism or short factual edits. However, the 16 edits so far linked to your IP address include multiple edits to extensively overhaul this article, and multiple reversions to edits (and multiple suggestions of reversions to my edits). Further, given the extent of your IP's sudden focus to this article, your IP's focus on Melbourne-themed articles, an examination of the history of this article, and the geo-location of your IP address (Greensborough, Melbourne), all lead me to suspect that you are also User:Melbguy05. As an experienced user, I am sure you are also familiar with Wikipedia:Sock puppetry and how it is regarded as a violation of community standards and policies (i.e. 1 user, 1 account). To that end, I intend to take this matter further. In the meantime, I would invite you to login and identify yourself by your regular account. Thank you. JabberJaw (talk) 00:20, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Pedophilia

@Mohd.maaz864: Sources - "Mr Cruel - considered a serial paedophile -", "Melbourne child killer, paedophile and rapist.", "paedophile and child killer dubbed as Mr Cruel", "the paedophile and child killer known as Mr Cruel", "Watson-Munro said Mr Cruel was not just a serial paedophile and could have picked on older, soft targets." [criminal psychologist Tim Watson-Munro]. "My view he is a child molester and not a paedophile, who seeks to have sexual relations exclusively with children" [Detective Senior Sergeant Chris O'Connor]. There is no MOS:PSYCH and MOS:MED#Categories guidelines apply to editing "medical articles".--Melbguy05 (talk) 01:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

References