Speaker 1: You're listening to a Mother MEA podcast. Mother MEA acknowledges
Speaker 1: the traditional owners of land and waders. This podcast was
Speaker 1: recorded on in November two thousand and two. At the
Speaker 1: age of seventy two, a man named Clifford Palmer died,
Speaker 1: a beloved husband of twenty two years and stepfather of seven,
Speaker 1: known as Poppy Cliff to his brood. His gravestone reads
Speaker 1: devoted to and sadly missed by children and grandchildren. By
Speaker 1: his family's account, he was a hard working, gentle and
Speaker 1: devout man, described as jovial, outdoorsy and adamant about keeping
Speaker 1: his kids on the right side of the law. What
Speaker 1: they didn't know is that he had a secret, a
Speaker 1: whole other life he lived before them, a whole other
Speaker 1: family who he murdered. His crimes were so sinister he
Speaker 1: was just ribed by the detective who arrested him as
Speaker 1: the most hateful man he ever knew, And yet he
Speaker 1: was allowed to start again, allowed to shed the title
Speaker 1: of Australia's worst family mass murderer to reinvent himself, a
Speaker 1: title he still holds to this day. I'm Jemma Bath
Speaker 1: and this is True Crime Conversations A Muma mea podcast
Speaker 1: exploring the world's most notorious crimes by speaking to the
Speaker 1: people who know the most about them. On September seventh,
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy one, at a remote farmhouse forty k's south
Speaker 1: of Adelaide, Clifford Bartholomew killed ten people. His wife, Heather,
Speaker 1: aged forty, his seven kids, Neville nineteen, Christine seventeen, Sharon fifteen,
Speaker 1: Helen thirteen, Gregory ten, Roger seven, and Sandra four. His
Speaker 1: sister in law Winness twenty six and her son Daniel
Speaker 1: nineteen months were also shot dead. So how was this killer,
Speaker 1: this mass murderer, able to reinvent his life and to
Speaker 1: have a second go at family across state lines? And
Speaker 1: why didn't we know about it before twenty eighteen? During
Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to hear two different voices. First,
Speaker 1: we'll be hearing from Craig Cook. He is the very
Speaker 1: reason we know about Clifford Bartholomew's second life. Craig's exclusive
Speaker 1: work as a journalist for the Adelaide Advertiser revealed the
Speaker 1: truth not just to the public, but also to the
Speaker 1: family Bartholomew had been helping raise for over two decades
Speaker 1: after he'd killed his own. Then we'll hear from former
Speaker 1: detective Alan Arthur, who was the first on the scene
Speaker 1: back in nineteen seventy one. We thought it was important
Speaker 1: to bring in someone who's not only familiar with the
Speaker 1: latest details of the case, but also someone who lived
Speaker 1: through it, faced Bartholomew and can explain how he was
Speaker 1: able to start over Craig. Why haven't we heard this
Speaker 1: story before? And I say we because I've never heard
Speaker 1: of it. My producer's never heard of it. I've asked
Speaker 1: around the editorial team. None of us have heard about
Speaker 1: this before. How has it flown so under the radar?
Speaker 2: Well, I'd never heard of it either. A great surprise
Speaker 2: to me. The reason I came across this story was
Speaker 2: editor of the Advertiser called John Whistler. I was as
Speaker 2: old as Moses, and he had heard of it. And
Speaker 2: he often dropped case studies on my desk and suggested
Speaker 2: that I might look through them and see if there
Speaker 2: was anything more defined. And one day he dropped these
Speaker 2: dusty papers and photographs of the Hope Valley murders and
Speaker 2: I just never heard of them. I asked around the
Speaker 2: office and people had never heard of it either. It
Speaker 2: was unbelievable. I couldn't believe a man who killed ten
Speaker 2: members of his family was given a death sentence and
Speaker 2: then was allowed out after eight years on parole, given
Speaker 2: a new identity and allowed to move into state.
Speaker 1: Take us back to the nineteen sixties early seventies. Who
Speaker 1: were the Bartholomew family and what did their life look
Speaker 1: like in Hope Forest, South Australia.
Speaker 2: Well, they were pool. They came from quite a rural
Speaker 2: area of South Australia down the south on the way
Speaker 2: to Victor Harbor for anybody who knows that region close
Speaker 2: to the wine and growing areas, but farmland back in
Speaker 2: those days. And mister Barthwallen in Clifford had a part
Speaker 2: time job as at the abatoar. Then they didn't have
Speaker 2: much money. I think they were renting the property from
Speaker 2: a farmer. It was only had four or five rooms
Speaker 2: if I re call Clifford and his wife and their
Speaker 2: seven children, so nine people in a small cottage. That's
Speaker 2: really all I know about them. Some people have interviewed
Speaker 2: since who kind of knew them at the time. So
Speaker 2: they were very quiet, said he was very quiet, never
Speaker 2: totally shocked bal he did on that day Father's Day
Speaker 2: in nineteen seventy one.
Speaker 1: Well, Hope Forest is a very isolated area, isn't it.
Speaker 1: There's not many people there.
Speaker 3: It's not a big community, no, very small.
Speaker 2: Everybody would know each other. But yeah, it's not a
Speaker 2: million miles from It's not up north in South Australia
Speaker 2: where you could be, you know, one hundred miles from anybody. Yeah,
Speaker 2: Thouven's not too far away. But yes, isolated for sure,
Speaker 2: and yeah, everybody would know. Every breath'd be one pub,
Speaker 2: everybody congregate there, that kind of thing.
Speaker 1: Do we know what state Clifford and Heather's marriage was
Speaker 1: in by late nineteen seventy one, just to help set
Speaker 1: the scene.
Speaker 2: Well, it wasn't in a good place. Basically, she'd asked
Speaker 2: him to leave. The story was that he suspected she
Speaker 2: was having an affair with a twenty two year old
Speaker 2: Vietnam Vet who would come to stay at their place
Speaker 2: and help them out, basically become a lodger at their
Speaker 2: house and was helping around the farm and doing different jobs,
Speaker 2: and Clifford suspected that his wife was having an affair
Speaker 2: with him. There's no evidence of it, in particular that
Speaker 2: there was any kind of sexual relationship. There was definitely
Speaker 2: a friendship if she went to Sydney with this person,
Speaker 2: but absolutely no evidence that there was any full blown affair.
Speaker 2: But he started be acting quite weirdly Clifford, and she
Speaker 2: asked him to leave. And on this day when the
Speaker 2: murders happened, it was Father's Den, and he was invited
Speaker 2: back because it was Father's Day. He left again that night,
Speaker 2: and then he returned in the night and committed his slaughter.
Speaker 2: So the suggestion is he may have been under pressure,
Speaker 2: and he may have been depressed, of course, and he
Speaker 2: was obviously fulfilled with rage and jealousy. That's still an
Speaker 2: extraordinary action to take.
Speaker 1: Doesn't really excuse hunting down and murdering.
Speaker 3: Ten people, No, and your loved ones too.
Speaker 1: So there were seven kids Heather yep. And then there
Speaker 1: were two other family members staying there that night that
Speaker 1: were also killed.
Speaker 2: Yep. Winness was have a sister and she had a
Speaker 2: young baby or eighteen month old child. They come down
Speaker 2: because it was Father's Day, I think. And then there
Speaker 2: was another child who'd come down to a couple of
Speaker 2: children of witnesses, including Noline who was an eight year
Speaker 2: old child, but her brother our older brother decided he'd
Speaker 2: take her back to Adelaide because he didn't like the
Speaker 2: atmosphere in the house. That was what he'd said. He
Speaker 2: felt like something bad was going to happen, and he
Speaker 2: was quite right. So that's the only reason that Noline
Speaker 2: survived was because her brother took her back to Adelaide
Speaker 2: and stayed with relatives.
Speaker 1: How did this shooting unfold? Did it start with Heather
Speaker 1: and then he just systematically went through rooms? Were they asleep?
Speaker 1: Were they awake?
Speaker 2: It was the middle of the night, and he went
Speaker 2: there with the intention of killing Heather. That's what he said.
Speaker 2: He made full statements as documented evidence of his state
Speaker 2: of mind and what he did in the order he
Speaker 2: did it. It's incredibly graphic and very disturbing. He got
Speaker 2: a maut from the garage and he intended to stand
Speaker 2: Heather and take her to the garage and shoot her
Speaker 2: there so that nobody woke up. Once he hit her
Speaker 2: with a marriage he woke up, all hell broke loose,
Speaker 2: and yeah, I just can't imagine the saying after that.
Speaker 2: There's some terrible, terrible imagery around it. All on some
Speaker 2: graphic details about his daughter begging him not to kill her.
Speaker 2: That was his eldest daughter, and he loved the best,
Speaker 2: he said in his statement, But he shot her. And
Speaker 2: then he did systematically go around the house, hitting people
Speaker 2: on the head with hammers and then shooting them. Unimaginable.
Speaker 2: I think some of the family members try to stop him.
Speaker 2: One of his sons definitely trying to stop him. There
Speaker 2: was fights, but they couldn't overpower him.
Speaker 1: Well, he was quite forthcoming in his police interviews, wasn't
Speaker 1: he about he's whine state of mind. Do you remember
Speaker 1: some of the things he said. You mentioned that he
Speaker 1: only meant to kill his wife, but I've seen it.
Speaker 1: Also said that he realized once he killed one of
Speaker 1: the children, he couldn't leave any of them alive in
Speaker 1: his mind.
Speaker 2: Because he loved them too much.
Speaker 3: That's what he said, because he loved them too much.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that was his statement about why he then had
Speaker 2: to systematically kill all the children. Most shocking to the
Speaker 2: police officer who investigated this case was the fact that
Speaker 2: he'd killed nine people. He went to the kitchen table,
Speaker 2: sat down, started drinking heavily, but after about thirty minutes,
Speaker 2: he realized the baby was still asleep in the cop
Speaker 2: and he went back, and he put a bullet in
Speaker 2: that baby's head that really really destroyed the police officer
Speaker 2: who investigated this. I just could not see the sense
Speaker 2: of that, and that's a that's why they call him
Speaker 2: a monster, and he is, in their mind, the worst
Speaker 2: person I've ever had to deal with.
Speaker 1: So that would have been nineteen month old Daniel.
Speaker 3: Correct his nephew, Yeah, who was asleep.
Speaker 1: The man that Clifford thought his wife was having an
Speaker 1: affair with. He was called mister X in the trial
Speaker 1: and you tracked him down. Could he tell you anything
Speaker 1: about that time or was there a reason you decided
Speaker 1: not to name.
Speaker 2: Him, not him any evidence you did have an affair,
Speaker 2: But that was his argument. I've got a couple of
Speaker 2: things to say about mister X actually, which we could include.
Speaker 2: So I found mister X, but I chose not to
Speaker 2: put him on the record. And the one thing that
Speaker 2: was of interest was there was a medical report that
Speaker 2: he'd been shot in the groin in Vietnam and he
Speaker 2: didn't have any function, so it wouldn't have been a
Speaker 2: sexual relationship. Even if he was having an affair with
Speaker 2: his wife, he didn't have the capacity to perform sexually.
Speaker 2: So I spoke to a third party. I knew his name,
Speaker 2: and I knew where he is, and I spoke to
Speaker 2: a relative of his, and I gave them several opportunities
Speaker 2: to talk to me, and in the end he chose
Speaker 2: not to, and I couldn't see any reason to pursue
Speaker 2: it any further. To be honest, I just didn't think
Speaker 2: he was going to add anymore. He was a twenty
Speaker 2: two year old kid, and he didn't know anything. I
Speaker 2: think he said at the time that he didn't have
Speaker 2: an affair with Heather. He said he was a friendship.
Speaker 2: And the night this happened, Clifford had been told by
Speaker 2: his wife. Heather told him that they were moving out
Speaker 2: of the farmhouse and they're going to move back into
Speaker 2: the city, basically into the Port Adelaide area, and that's
Speaker 2: where mister X was from. And this was something else
Speaker 2: that has said. By following you off, he believed that
Speaker 2: this mister X was now going to become the father
Speaker 2: to his children. This is what he strangely put together,
Speaker 2: that his family was leaving, not only leaving him, but
Speaker 2: leaving the area and going to set up house mister X.
Speaker 1: But you couldn't find proof that that was what was
Speaker 1: going to happen.
Speaker 2: No, no proof of all, but no nobody else confirmed it.
Speaker 2: But that's wouldn't have surprised that ad was trying to
Speaker 2: get out of the situation, her marriage already broken down.
Speaker 1: Some of the interesting horrific things in his police interviews
Speaker 1: that he did say was, you know, he tried to
Speaker 1: excuse it by saying he had five months of mental
Speaker 1: torture thinking that his wife was having this affair, and
Speaker 1: then when he was shooting his family, he couldn't control
Speaker 1: the screaming noises in his head and so he just
Speaker 1: kept going until it all went quiet. There's just something
Speaker 1: so chilling about hearing this man being able to articulate
Speaker 1: so clearly what he was doing.
Speaker 2: Was stall processes and what he so he's feeling the
Speaker 2: screaming and the only thing that's going to stop the
Speaker 2: scream is to keep killing people. Yeah, just very difficult
Speaker 2: to get inside of his mind. These were his loved ones.
Speaker 2: This is not strangers, He's not people attacking it. These
Speaker 2: are the greatest loves of his life. And it takes
Speaker 2: fifty minutes. It's a long time of killing and beating
Speaker 2: and going back and Yeah, at some stage you would
Speaker 2: think that something would say stop, that stop, enough is enough.
Speaker 2: But obviously he must have got it in his head
Speaker 2: that nobody could survive this because he loved them.
Speaker 1: But forty to fifty minutes suggests so much premeditation. You
Speaker 1: have to really be thinking as you as you're shooting
Speaker 1: to continue for that amount of time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And he was having conversations with his children, especially
Speaker 2: at this time, his discussions and begging and pleading, and
Speaker 2: I think it was an instant with his summary. He
Speaker 2: hit his son over the head and he kind of
Speaker 2: became unconscious, and he went back to his bed, But
Speaker 2: then the sun woke up again and there was a fight,
Speaker 2: and then he ended up shooting his son after all
Speaker 2: of the sudden Yeah, I just can't get inside his
Speaker 2: head to imagine why you would keep going. I mean,
Speaker 2: what are you trying to achieve here? Obviously the obliteration
Speaker 2: of your family. Well, something that really annoyed the investigators
Speaker 2: is that they didn't have the courage to kill himself.
Speaker 2: You really think if he'd gone through all this horror
Speaker 2: to save his family from a horror, why wouldn't he
Speaker 2: kill himself. What a selfish individual that he would go
Speaker 2: back and shoot a baby, but he didn't have the
Speaker 2: guts to kill himself. That's why they're describing as the
Speaker 2: most horrendous man they'd ever met.
Speaker 1: How were the murders discovered? Was he arrested pretty quickly
Speaker 1: after all of this.
Speaker 2: He found his mother at four or five o'clock in
Speaker 2: the morning. He wasn't living too far away, and she
Speaker 2: said call the police, so he did. It was the
Speaker 2: Monday morning after Father's Day, pauling weather, the middle of winter,
Speaker 2: and yes, one police officer managed to find his way
Speaker 2: down there and found the scene about finding him was
Speaker 2: still there in the kitchen, and then obviously he report
Speaker 2: already in and quickly escalated to seenior police officers getting
Speaker 2: involved and heading down there.
Speaker 1: After the break. I asked Craig about what it was
Speaker 1: like interviewing Alan Arthur, the detective who arrested Clifford Buffolow.
Speaker 1: You and you've spoken to some of the officers that
Speaker 1: had to look at that scene and kind of investigate
Speaker 1: that scene.
Speaker 2: I spoke to both senior officers involved. There's footage, video
Speaker 2: footage of the day without sounding virturedly probably a good thing.
Speaker 2: And there they are looking like young men, shocked, young
Speaker 2: men I interviewed them as seventy five year old, and
Speaker 2: they're still shot by this case. It really has disturbed
Speaker 2: them and what they saw that Daves. They said, no
Speaker 2: issue have to witness something like that, and they just
Speaker 2: couldn't make sense of it. But yeah, I just really
Speaker 2: show them to the bar in that story.
Speaker 4: I can never forgive you. Never. It's unforgivable what he
Speaker 4: did when it came to children, A two year old
Speaker 4: baby and a cock puts the gun to its hidden kills.
Speaker 4: I mean, goodness, grace to me, it's not normal that
Speaker 4: it was for him.
Speaker 1: Do we know if it made headlines at the time.
Speaker 1: We're saying we don't. We haven't heard about it. Now
Speaker 1: at the time nineteen seventy one, do people know about it?
Speaker 2: I certainly made headlines. It was Australia's biggest mass killing.
Speaker 2: It's Liz Australia's biggest mass family killing. So yes, it
Speaker 2: made headlines around the country. Whyat then disappeared? I mean,
Speaker 2: Adelaide's down from a lot of murders and mysteries, this
Speaker 2: one kind of definitely disappeared from the public consciousness. I
Speaker 2: can't a friend who remembers it. It's yeah, definitely just
Speaker 2: I got lost. I think there must have been a
Speaker 2: lot of publicity around when he was released, So that's
Speaker 2: seventy eight, seventy nine, But after that the story disappears.
Speaker 1: He was sentenced to death by hanging, which was still
Speaker 1: a thing back then in December nineteen seventy one, but
Speaker 1: that didn't happen, did it.
Speaker 2: He was sentenced to death by Dame Roma Mitchell. How
Speaker 2: she became Dame Roma Mitchell, She was the judge, and yes,
Speaker 2: she's sentenced him to death by hanging. Everybody thought that
Speaker 2: was probably a just a just result. But even then
Speaker 2: they knew the Dunston government. If the Dunstan government came in,
Speaker 2: they were probably going to get rid of the death
Speaker 2: penalty and he probably would just serve life imprisonment. So
Speaker 2: that was already kind of known when he got a
Speaker 2: death sentence, but a life imprisonment probably, and if alons
Speaker 2: it meant life imprisonment, I think everybody could go with that.
Speaker 2: What became so shocking was after eight years he applied
Speaker 2: for parole and Dame Rome and Mitchell was head of
Speaker 2: the prole board who gave him parole after eight years
Speaker 2: in prison.
Speaker 1: Why why Craig do we know why we don't.
Speaker 2: We have a few insights. The file, apparently, is one
Speaker 2: sheet of paper, that is the file that allowed Clifford
Speaker 2: Barthoomy back into the community, a man who killed ten people,
Speaker 2: and the piece of paper basically implies that he had
Speaker 2: mental issues at the time, depression, and that the psychologist
Speaker 2: report suggested he would never do this ever again, which
Speaker 2: is quite leap it is, and he probably shouldn't have
Speaker 2: had the opportunity to do it ever again either, So
Speaker 2: that was the logic. And then the other thing that
Speaker 2: came through was that this was considered a domestic violence
Speaker 2: incident and therefore of a lesser. If he'd killed ten strangers,
Speaker 2: there's no way he would have been out of prison.
Speaker 2: But he killed his own family, and therefore some kind
Speaker 2: of logic suggests that he he's not a threat to
Speaker 2: anybody else.
Speaker 1: That is mind boggling totally, because even I mean, you
Speaker 1: try and wrap your head around the fact that, right,
Speaker 1: they think that this guy isn't going to do it again,
Speaker 1: so therefore will let him out. But it's also he
Speaker 1: wasn't punished for the crimes he did do.
Speaker 2: He was called a model prisoner, which I don't know
Speaker 2: what that means. But yeah, a model prisoner. So I
Speaker 2: didn't kill anybody in prison.
Speaker 1: He wasn't just released after eight years. He was kind
Speaker 1: of given a chance of a new life. He was
Speaker 1: given a new identity by the government, wasn't he.
Speaker 2: Eventually he wasn't given a new identity. Initially, he moved
Speaker 2: back into the community where he came from. He moved
Speaker 2: back into Port Adelaide where he'd originally come from, and
Speaker 2: there were threats against his life. Obviously, there was a
Speaker 2: lot of outrage about the fact that he was back
Speaker 2: in the community. And it was mainly because it took
Speaker 2: a few years, but mainly because of the threats against
Speaker 2: his life that the decision was made to give him
Speaker 2: a new identity and he chose to move into state.
Speaker 2: He went to Victoria.
Speaker 1: He went by Clifford Palmer, so he kept his first
Speaker 1: name his.
Speaker 2: First name, just changed the second name to Palmer, not Bartholomew.
Speaker 1: And who did he reinvent himself as that's.
Speaker 2: A very good question. I don't think we know a
Speaker 2: lot of details about. But definitely a Christian man. Because
Speaker 2: he met his next wife, I think it may have
Speaker 2: been a dancel, but he definitely claimed he was a
Speaker 2: man of God, and she was very religious. That was
Speaker 2: a very important factor for her, and probably you know,
Speaker 2: one of the main reasons they got together was the
Speaker 2: fact that he was he said he was a man
Speaker 2: of God. By this stage he was quite elderly. I
Speaker 2: can't remember what work he did after that. He had
Speaker 2: a few jobs before they moved to Queensland.
Speaker 1: So he married Merle. He had a second marriage and
Speaker 1: a second family.
Speaker 2: Melgray mel Gray born in Sri Lanka, immigrant to Australia,
Speaker 2: who had seven children.
Speaker 4: Row.
Speaker 1: It's kind of eerie, isn't it? Seven children and again.
Speaker 2: Seven Jordren again. Yeah. Yeah, we'll get to the stage
Speaker 2: where I found his grapes down and it was absolutely
Speaker 2: mind blown by what it says on the stage on
Speaker 2: the grapes down.
Speaker 1: Do we know if mel was aware of what.
Speaker 2: He'd done, the suggestion from the family. I later obviously
Speaker 2: had to talk to the family eventually, and I'm pretty
Speaker 2: sure he had said that he killed his wife. I
Speaker 2: think he declared that, but it was supposed to be
Speaker 2: a jealous rage, and the fact that he came out
Speaker 2: after eight years suggested that it was nothing. It was
Speaker 2: a fit of anger against one person, and that it
Speaker 2: was basically a man slaughter charge so easily justified. He
Speaker 2: had his release papers, which was still in his possession,
Speaker 2: and if he turned those, then maybe he had admitted
Speaker 2: the family. Winder family seemed to know that he had
Speaker 2: killed his wife on some stage, but it was, yeah,
Speaker 2: some misunderstanding or didn't mean to kill her. And he
Speaker 2: only served eight years, so therefore it kind of been
Speaker 2: that serious.
Speaker 1: And what kind of stepfather was he?
Speaker 2: They could not have been more glowing in their praise
Speaker 2: for him as a stepfather. So seven children and then
Speaker 2: all the marriages of those children, and then all those grandchildren.
Speaker 2: Can't remember how many there are, There's a lot. And
Speaker 2: they said nobody could have a bad word for him.
Speaker 2: The whole family enjoyed his company and never saw him
Speaker 2: raise a fist or be even angry in any situation.
Speaker 2: That's what they told me. And obviously when they knew
Speaker 2: the full story, they were very shocked.
Speaker 1: Well, he was in their lives. He was married to
Speaker 1: Merle for over twenty two years. He died in two
Speaker 1: thousand and two in his seventies. She died in twenty twelve,
Speaker 1: and by this point, the truth of the magnitude of
Speaker 1: his crimes were still kind of hidden to the family,
Speaker 1: wasn't it. How did they find out?
Speaker 2: Hidden to everybody knew obviously, and that new life they
Speaker 2: found out because I told him.
Speaker 1: Tell us about how you came into this story. You
Speaker 1: mentioned at the start that you got this case report
Speaker 1: thrown onto your desk.
Speaker 2: Well, whenever John threw something in my way and it
Speaker 2: was going to be interesting. He only chose really interesting stories,
Speaker 2: and as we said, it was just one unbelievable and too.
Speaker 2: I just knew there had to be more to it
Speaker 2: in some aspect, and I really did that. Even at
Speaker 2: that stage. I wanted to know what happened to him,
Speaker 2: But even more so when I met Noline, who was
Speaker 2: the young girl who survived the massacre, because she was
Speaker 2: full of anger, hate and fear. This is a woman
Speaker 2: in her fifties who had lived in incredible trauma and
Speaker 2: she still feared from him, her uncle Barty. She had
Speaker 2: nightmares about him coming back and shooting her. So once
Speaker 2: I interviewed her, I definitely want to know what happened
Speaker 2: to her. Clifford Bath following me, I thought we owed
Speaker 2: it to her to tell her. If he was dead,
Speaker 2: there was strong chance he was, but she should know
Speaker 2: and hopefully they put her out of some kind of misery.
Speaker 2: How she found out about the murders was just horrendous.
Speaker 2: She was a police officers came to the house where
Speaker 2: she was staying, and her mother came in and told
Speaker 2: her to go and go in the bedroom. So it
Speaker 2: obviously said she couldn't hear anything. The TV was under
Speaker 2: the bedroom and while the police officers were informing her
Speaker 2: so not her mother, I think it was an auntie
Speaker 2: who was looking after it about what had happened. It
Speaker 2: came up on the television and there were pictures and
Speaker 2: Noleen so saw that her mother and brother are being killed,
Speaker 2: plus her wife of family, seven cousins found out her
Speaker 2: family had been and she sat there and watched the
Speaker 2: TV and that's how she floaded.
Speaker 3: That's horrendous, yeah, and imaginable.
Speaker 2: So no wonder she's got a lot of trauma and yeah,
Speaker 2: So that was the first story I wrote, really was
Speaker 2: about her her journey and however, we wanted to know
Speaker 2: if he was alive, and then I kind of made
Speaker 2: an approach to police, so I interviewed the two police
Speaker 2: officers too to get the full story. They were very
Speaker 2: kind in their time. And then I approached the police
Speaker 2: and asked them if they could confirm if he was
Speaker 2: dead or alive. I took a couple of emails, and
Speaker 2: then I got a very surprising email back that's confirm
Speaker 2: who was dead, but also told me his surname, which
Speaker 2: I was not expecting. So with that and I started
Speaker 2: looking for him and I found him.
Speaker 1: Well, you found he's Tony's grave. He found his tombstone,
Speaker 1: and that's.
Speaker 2: How I knew, and i'd boy the dates, I just
Speaker 2: worked out it had to be him. And what was
Speaker 2: on the tombstone was the greatest love from your children
Speaker 2: and grandchildren, just the man who killed his first family.
Speaker 1: What did you think when you first saw that?
Speaker 2: One of the most surprising things I've ever seen. I think,
Speaker 2: just you can't. I mean, at this stage, I didn't
Speaker 2: know there was seven children, all these grandchildren, so I
Speaker 2: just couldn't understand it. I thought, how did that happen?
Speaker 2: Maybe it's not him, because here's the loving children and
Speaker 2: grandchildren giving their grandpapa a lovely stand off. I just yes.
Speaker 2: And then when I told Norlen, of course I was
Speaker 2: that's so far worse. She couldn't believe he'd gotten another
Speaker 2: family and lived happily. I mean, even if he hadn't
Speaker 2: caused any more chaos. He didn't deserve that, I was
Speaker 2: her opinion. He didn't deserve another life and another family.
Speaker 1: So how did you track down the second family that
Speaker 1: all the kids and the relatives, and how did you
Speaker 1: have these conversations with them about his true identity?
Speaker 2: I tracked them down the same way I found Orleane probably,
Speaker 2: which is social media, so people who were a presence
Speaker 2: on social media. So you're just slow putting two and
Speaker 2: two together. Eventually I worked out where he was from,
Speaker 2: where Clifford must have been living, and then worked out
Speaker 2: had Mills name by that stage, So eventually I worked
Speaker 2: out who he was, where he was and where he lived.
Speaker 2: I mean, we were ready to publish, and you have
Speaker 2: to give the respect to that family and tell them
Speaker 2: that what are we publishing and warn them, yeah, they're
Speaker 2: in Queensland. Maybe it wouldn't have even reached them being
Speaker 2: published in Adelaide, maybe not, but they deserve the respect
Speaker 2: to know what was being published and what was being
Speaker 2: said about their grandfather and stepfather. Very difficult, I thought
Speaker 2: the family handled things magnificently. They had a family conference.
Speaker 2: They had told everybody of an adult age about what
Speaker 2: was going to be said that it was probably true.
Speaker 2: In fact, it was true. They researched it all themselves,
Speaker 2: and yeah, they dealt with it very well. Terrible shocked
Speaker 2: at them all. They just couldn't get their head around it.
Speaker 1: One of the family members that you ended up quoting
Speaker 1: in your stories kind of said he was glad he
Speaker 1: was dead by then.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it would have been obviously Flowers, if it'd been alive. Yeah,
Speaker 2: just an impossible situation if it'd been alive. So thankfully
Speaker 2: it had all happened after Clifford had passed on.
Speaker 1: I want to talk a bit more about Noline, because
Speaker 1: she seems like, you know, a bit like the forgotten
Speaker 1: victim in this story. How has that the crime shaped
Speaker 1: her life?
Speaker 2: Very hard to judge, but having interviewed her, I know
Speaker 2: it's it's the most traumatic incident of her life and
Speaker 2: she has lived in fear. Basically she had. Some people
Speaker 2: might think it's not realistic that he had ever come
Speaker 2: back and kill her, but she she believed that was
Speaker 2: a possibility, that yeah, he was mad enough to kill Tempe,
Speaker 2: But why wasn't he mad enough to come and find
Speaker 2: her and kill her? And she had children as well.
Speaker 2: By the stage, she had a few children of her own.
Speaker 2: And I think she suffered what all of us suffered,
Speaker 2: which is the how how can you have been let out?
Speaker 2: And how could have been given the chance of the
Speaker 2: second life. She really struggled that he didn't he wouldn't
Speaker 2: face punishment for wrecking her life and ten other lives,
Speaker 2: I mean, and dozens of other lives. Potentially, There's a
Speaker 2: whole population that he killed that night. It wasn't just
Speaker 2: ten people. There was a futures, whether they got married,
Speaker 2: they all have had children, There's a continuation there that
Speaker 2: he obliterated and those kind of things. Yes, she really
Speaker 2: struggled with She wanted him. I mean, she was very
Speaker 2: frank about how she wanted him to die and he
Speaker 2: should die in pain because she felt pain, and she
Speaker 2: wanted him to have had a miserable life. And then
Speaker 2: she found out he had an incredibly wonderful life for
Speaker 2: the last twenty years of his life.
Speaker 1: Is there an argument to the very least that she
Speaker 1: should have been told that he was dead.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. I tried to get something happening at the time
Speaker 2: around this case that victims should be informed. This is
Speaker 2: an extraordinary case, but there are other incidences where victims
Speaker 2: do not know what happened to the perpetry. I mean,
Speaker 2: other people have had new identities and disappeared, and I
Speaker 2: think you should be told if somebody in that circumstances
Speaker 2: has died. I think it would make a difference rather
Speaker 2: than people wondering what's going on and if they're coming back,
Speaker 2: And yeah, I think that's the least the police could
Speaker 2: do in those circumstances.
Speaker 1: Did you contact the South Australian Parole Board and kind
Speaker 1: of ask them retrospectively why did this happen? Could this
Speaker 1: happen again? Would they able to give you any answers?
Speaker 2: This South Australian prole Board on the head is Francis
Speaker 2: Nelson QC. She's been ed for thirty three years. She's
Speaker 2: a great friend of Roma Mitchell's and she's a little
Speaker 2: bit mystified too. But then she's said that they don't
Speaker 2: have didn't have the full story back in nineteen seventy nine,
Speaker 2: and that these days there would be far more evidence,
Speaker 2: far more interviews and psychological profiling. She believes the Parole
Speaker 2: board today would have a lot more information to be
Speaker 2: basing a judgment on if you can't say whether they'd
Speaker 2: make the same decision or not, but I'm thinking probably not,
Speaker 2: But who knows. But yeah, it's a surprise.
Speaker 1: Which I guess is reassuring. But what worries me is
Speaker 1: how many other Clifford's are out there from the sixties, seventies,
Speaker 1: eighties that perhaps got new identities that we don't know about.
Speaker 1: Do you think that that's a common occurrence or am
Speaker 1: I kind of catastrophizing it a bit?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 2: No, I definitely think it was a common occurrence back
Speaker 2: in the sixties, seventies, eighties. Maybe it still happens, probably
Speaker 2: happens in cases less horrific and less high profile than
Speaker 2: this was at the time. It's apite the fact that
Speaker 2: it disappeared from public view. But yeah, there must be
Speaker 2: a lot of people who get new identities.
Speaker 1: When you look back at your career and all the
Speaker 1: stories you've covered, how does this one compare?
Speaker 2: Cover a lot of stories, a lot of amazing stories.
Speaker 2: This is probably the most surprising the fact, Yeah, this
Speaker 2: would have to be the most surprising to actually track
Speaker 2: him down, thinking I remember I was thinking well, we're
Speaker 2: never going to find him, and then thanks to the police,
Speaker 2: I'd like to think somebody in the police officer did
Speaker 2: the right thing and gave me his name. Maybe it
Speaker 2: was an accident, but maybe not. And yeah, just from
Speaker 2: that point of view, we ever going to find him again?
Speaker 2: I mean I think we all knew he was dead,
Speaker 2: but then actually find him to find out what had
Speaker 2: happened for us twenty ode years of his life. Yeah,
Speaker 2: definitely the most surprising outcome.
Speaker 1: It's been quite a few years since you kind of
Speaker 1: broke the news to his second family. Have you heard
Speaker 1: anything from them since? How they've fared since learning this?
Speaker 2: Nothing? No, I wouldn't expect to. I hope they've fared
Speaker 2: very well. I hope they coped and they put it
Speaker 2: behind them, because what else can they do. I mean,
Speaker 2: there was that there were not absolutely no knowledge. I
Speaker 2: don't imagine Merle had full knowledge of happened. And where
Speaker 2: do you go and check up even on something like that.
Speaker 2: I mean, there are many famous murder cases in Australia.
Speaker 2: This should have been one of them, but it wasn't.
Speaker 2: So they had no way of finding out truth about
Speaker 2: what Clifford had done and whether what he was telling
Speaker 2: them was the truth. They did find in his papers
Speaker 2: after he died, the release notice from the prison which
Speaker 2: said he'd been released after three years and for murdering
Speaker 2: his wife. Of course, we go back to that time
Speaker 2: when he wasn't charged with the other murders, so it.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't have been it wouldn't have been in the prison papers.
Speaker 2: It was not his records. Yeah, so that was a
Speaker 2: frustration for the police officers who believed he should have
Speaker 2: been charged with all the murders at the time. And
Speaker 2: then they were relaxed about it because he's got a
Speaker 2: death sentence. And then ultimately that probably paid offer him
Speaker 2: that he was not charged with all those other murders,
Speaker 2: so he could be made to look like he just
Speaker 2: killed his wife in a fit of anger.
Speaker 1: Did those police officers try to go back and get
Speaker 1: those charges once he'd been released. Were they like, okay,
Speaker 1: well let's try and charge him.
Speaker 2: It was out of their hands. They won't send any
Speaker 2: police officers. It's down to the prosecution. By that stage,
Speaker 2: they did push telling me they really thought I think
Speaker 2: the police, even higher up the police thought he should
Speaker 2: be charged. But there was a consensus that we waste
Speaker 2: public money and he's going to prison for the rest
Speaker 2: of his life anyway, so let's not waste our time.
Speaker 1: I think the thing that surprises me about this story
Speaker 1: not being bigger in terms of one of those stories
Speaker 1: that all Australians know the name Clifford Buffalome slash Clifford Palmer,
Speaker 1: is that in the media, to have a good story,
Speaker 1: you need vision, you need photos, you need color, and
Speaker 1: this had everything. We've got the photos of the victims.
Speaker 3: We've got photos of him exactly.
Speaker 2: There is footage of the day that they found the bodies.
Speaker 2: There's the body of Winness laying out in the open
Speaker 2: in the rain with a cover over it. It's just
Speaker 2: just to see that footage was just horrendous. You're there
Speaker 2: and you know how those police officers are feeling. You
Speaker 2: can see the look on their faces that they've just
Speaker 2: been inside that house and they've never seen anything like it,
Speaker 2: and I've never want to see anything like it again. Yeah,
Speaker 2: we've got all that. It's not like we're missing much.
Speaker 2: We've got a full confession. There's no mystery about what
Speaker 2: happened in more order on that day. So yes, that's
Speaker 2: another baffling reason for why this is not not in
Speaker 2: the public consciousness.
Speaker 1: And you can't really, through your travels explain why.
Speaker 2: No. I've got no understanding why missing. The only thing
Speaker 2: I can think of is that it was a family affair.
Speaker 2: Somebody said that to me once. This was a family
Speaker 2: a fair, a personal episode, and therefore you know it's
Speaker 2: not about particular interest too. If you've been hunting and
Speaker 2: killed ten people out in the forest, as other people
Speaker 2: have done, maybe his they would be more famous, but
Speaker 2: killing them in his own farmhouse was obviously not the
Speaker 2: same impact. A lot of people said it was a
Speaker 2: good I remember doing that. A lot of people who
Speaker 2: lived in the area at the time were involved in racing,
Speaker 2: and I used to cover racing, and that's when I
Speaker 2: got back there. It was a good blow. He just
Speaker 2: had a mad moment.
Speaker 1: You're listening to True Crime Conversations with me Jemma Bath.
Speaker 1: Up next, I talk with former detective Alan Arthur, who
Speaker 1: shares some more about the crime scene, his interactions with
Speaker 1: Clifford Buffolomew, and the reasoning behind the sentence he received. Alan,
Speaker 1: where were you at in your life and your career
Speaker 1: in nineteen seventy one.
Speaker 4: We were living in Adelaide and It was a peaceful
Speaker 4: sort of life, except that I used to be called
Speaker 4: out to go to homicide and other violent crimes from
Speaker 4: time to time. Not the only one member of the
Speaker 4: homicids squad, but yeah, it happened regularly.
Speaker 1: By the way, how long had you been a detective at.
Speaker 4: That point, seven years? And I was in my third
Speaker 4: year in a HOMOICAIDS squad, So you were.
Speaker 1: Fairly experienced when it came to being on the scene
Speaker 1: of really horrible murders and grizzly crimes.
Speaker 4: Well, that's true, and I've been to half a dozen
Speaker 4: or so murders in the three years preceding the Hope
Speaker 4: Forest murders, so it wasn't a new event. But I
Speaker 4: must say the size of the numbers of victims was
Speaker 4: far more than I've ever seen before.
Speaker 1: Do you remember when you first got the call asking
Speaker 1: you to attend the Farming Forest?
Speaker 4: I we do, take me down there. The detective Sergeant
Speaker 4: Giles was the death sergeant and he had only just
Speaker 4: come on the early hours of the morning for the
Speaker 4: morning ship. His job was to coordinate work and attending members,
Speaker 4: allocate them work to do, and he ran me for memory.
Speaker 4: It was still dark, and he said, we've got a
Speaker 4: job on. We've got ten people dead at a place
Speaker 4: called Hope Posts in the Adelaide Hills. We'll pick you
Speaker 4: up and convey you to headquarters and from there you
Speaker 4: will be off to Hope for us.
Speaker 1: And when you arrived at the farm, what was that like?
Speaker 1: What did you first see? What was going on?
Speaker 4: On arrival? Uniform police were there, and I think the
Speaker 4: doctor that came with the local uniform police officer was there,
Speaker 4: that's from memory. But outside there was the body of
Speaker 4: a woman and she was dead and had a gunshop
Speaker 4: into her head. And then we're inside and it was
Speaker 4: just a short distance inside the back door to where
Speaker 4: the kitchen was located, and sitting at the kitchen having
Speaker 4: what I remember was a beer, was the successful following you,
Speaker 4: the owner of the house or the renter of the house,
Speaker 4: and the relative of a woman lying dead outside. As
Speaker 4: I came into the kitchen, I just introduced myself and
Speaker 4: told him I'd be talking to him shortly. He continued
Speaker 4: with his glass of beer. A uniformant police officer was
Speaker 4: standing not too far away, keeping a very close eye
Speaker 4: on him. And so I didn't inspect that the crime
Speaker 4: scene and found bodies scattered throughout the house. There were
Speaker 4: nine bodies, including the passes way. His wife was lying
Speaker 4: on her back in the main bedroom with the gunshot.
Speaker 4: Winner of the head. They all had gunshot went the
Speaker 4: head and including a two year old baby in a
Speaker 4: cot which was related to the woman lying outside.
Speaker 1: That would have been Winners.
Speaker 3: That was outside.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 1: What kind of state was Clifford in? Was he distressed?
Speaker 4: Was he?
Speaker 1: Did he say anything to you?
Speaker 4: When I spoke to him, he spoke pleasantly, so to speak.
Speaker 4: He didn't show any signs of distraught. Cool, calm and
Speaker 4: collected was the only way I can describe him having
Speaker 4: just killed ten people, which surprised me to a point.
Speaker 4: But once I got to know him doing my questioning
Speaker 4: of him, it was easy to understand that he just
Speaker 4: was able to do things and not get too flushed
Speaker 4: about it.
Speaker 1: Why do you say that? Why was he that kind
Speaker 1: of personality?
Speaker 4: I don't know what was behind his personality, but he
Speaker 4: was a slaughterman by occupation, and I mean that sort
Speaker 4: of ditched him with what he did at the house,
Speaker 4: by the way, but he seemed cool and collective. He
Speaker 4: was never flustered, not during the entire interview with him,
Speaker 4: where he made full of admissions, clear admissions about what
Speaker 4: he did, the execution of his whole family and extended
Speaker 4: family members. He was just a very cool customer and
Speaker 4: didn't try to hide anything.
Speaker 1: You've described him as being the most hateful man you knew.
Speaker 1: Do you stand by that?
Speaker 4: I can never forgive him. Never. No, It's unforgivable what
Speaker 4: he did when it came to children. I meant, a
Speaker 4: two year old baby and a cop puts the gun
Speaker 4: to its head and kills I mean, goodness, grace to me,
Speaker 4: it's not normal, but it was for him.
Speaker 1: You were the one that actually arrested him at the scene,
Speaker 1: won't you?
Speaker 4: I am, how did.
Speaker 1: The crime scene, seeing what he had done to those children,
Speaker 1: to his wife, to his sister in law, how did
Speaker 1: it affect you seeing.
Speaker 4: All of that? Well, I'm looking at all the photographs now,
Speaker 4: and I mean it's just a despicable situation. You've got
Speaker 4: a wife lying on her back in the main bedroom,
Speaker 4: shot in the head, got a four year old girl
Speaker 4: in a bed alongside her, shot in the head. They're
Speaker 4: all gunshot run into the head. You've got in the hallway,
Speaker 4: two teenage girls who woke up to the commotion, and
Speaker 4: he gunned them down, all shot in the head. A
Speaker 4: boy also woke up. He's lying in the passage. Gunshot
Speaker 4: went into the head. You've got the the young baby
Speaker 4: in the cot, and another young boy in a bed
Speaker 4: alongside the all shot in the head, and the nineteen
Speaker 4: year old son. He woke and tried to intervene, but
Speaker 4: was bludgeoned with a mallet, and some of the other
Speaker 4: victors were belted with a mallet as well, But the
Speaker 4: nineteen year old son, having been built with a mallet,
Speaker 4: went back to his bed, and of course he too
Speaker 4: was in short in the head, as they all were
Speaker 4: and winners.
Speaker 1: She was shot outside. Did he suggest that she was
Speaker 1: trying to run?
Speaker 4: Absolutely? She It was clear that she had tried to
Speaker 4: get out of the house. Who pursued her with the
Speaker 4: mallet and bashed her in the head till she was
Speaker 4: apparently unconscious or certainly stunn very stunned, And then he
Speaker 4: went back, got his rifle and shot her in the head.
Speaker 1: It's just shocking to hear, isn't it. The details of
Speaker 1: what he.
Speaker 4: Did well, it is I have I had one wish
Speaker 4: for his soul that, Hey, wats and Hill, I can
Speaker 4: see why I have no people as man whatsoever. Never.
Speaker 4: I mean, it's now what fifty four years since since
Speaker 4: these murders occurred a contillionaire, they're still quite fresh in
Speaker 4: my mind, and they were persistent till I passed allow.
Speaker 4: I suppose the thing.
Speaker 1: That I think about when I imagine Buffalo you going
Speaker 1: on this rampage is that it's not like it was
Speaker 1: happening within a few minutes. It happened over nearly the
Speaker 1: course of an hour, So that gives a lot of
Speaker 1: time and space to reconsider, to talk to his victims
Speaker 1: as he did it.
Speaker 4: Yes, that's right, But the incentive poem was his intent
Speaker 4: to kill his Why and whether that was his only
Speaker 4: wish before he actually shot her just to kill her,
Speaker 4: I don't wear that that's what he intended to do,
Speaker 4: but he got carried away. I think he had an
Speaker 4: intent to do more, more killings than justice. Well, and
Speaker 4: now the reason I say that because intentionally he went
Speaker 4: he had to reload his single shot twenty two rifle
Speaker 4: each time, he had to have access to rounds of
Speaker 4: ammunition nearby. He had to unlock the breach, put the
Speaker 4: bulletin physically one hand, close the breach, pull the trigger,
Speaker 4: and kill unlocked the breach discharged an expended round. Busically
Speaker 4: by hand, put in a fresh round into the breach,
Speaker 4: close the breach, and pull the trigger. He had to
Speaker 4: do that ten times. There's just no there was nothing
Speaker 4: happened automatically.
Speaker 1: When he was initially charge or went to trial. He
Speaker 1: was only tried for the murder of his wife, not
Speaker 1: the rest of the children. How did you feel about that?
Speaker 4: Well, that was my instigation. I charged him with it.
Speaker 4: It was There's a couple of reasons for it. One
Speaker 4: reason is that there was ample evidence of intent to
Speaker 4: kill his wife, ample evidence. There was ample evidence to
Speaker 4: show that he went on to kill, to actively kill
Speaker 4: his family, but to have previous intent. There might have
Speaker 4: been some doubt that these are just sort of reactionary
Speaker 4: activities that took place following the intentional killing. So I
Speaker 4: only charged him with the one that we had the
Speaker 4: most evidence about, because you're respected. Whether you're charged him
Speaker 4: at ten, he's only going to get to suit at
Speaker 4: the same time in jail, and so that was the
Speaker 4: one that the proof was in abundance, whereas the others
Speaker 4: there might have been excuses for rage and mental problems
Speaker 4: and so forth, And he was admitting freely to having
Speaker 4: wanting to murder his wife, And did.
Speaker 1: You think it wasn't worth the risk of trying to
Speaker 1: go for the other nine charges?
Speaker 4: Well, the fact of life is the courts took into
Speaker 4: account those matters. He didn't necessarily have to charge him
Speaker 4: with ten murders. The circumstances of him committing the murder
Speaker 4: upon his wife included all the acts that he did
Speaker 4: to kill the others as well, So there wasn't necessary
Speaker 4: for him to be charged with ten counts of murder,
Speaker 4: although some people within the police thought I should have
Speaker 4: charged him with more, but I wanted to make sure
Speaker 4: I got him convicted of murder where the evidence was
Speaker 4: most pronounced, that he in tent was clear, whereas he
Speaker 4: might have used the defense of emotions and exaggerated behavior
Speaker 4: and the lack of intent, whereas with his killing of
Speaker 4: his wife it was just total intent.
Speaker 1: As much as I know of the justice system nowadays,
Speaker 1: if he was to be charged now with all ten murders,
Speaker 1: it would be a different story to back then he
Speaker 1: would get more time Now.
Speaker 4: I don't know whether he would really I don't know,
Speaker 4: I'm not quite sure that so with the parole system
Speaker 4: the way it is these days, what I read in
Speaker 4: the paper that people walk away after a very short
Speaker 4: times having committed some pretty atrocious crimes. I mean he
Speaker 4: was sentenced to death. Yeah, and that in it sort
Speaker 4: of was a big deal in those days, although governments
Speaker 4: were committing death sentenced to life imprisonment. But when you
Speaker 4: when the sentence came out, I can tell you now
Speaker 4: that the atmosphere in the court was pretty high, you
Speaker 4: know when the judge reads out the death since it
Speaker 4: was really something when the.
Speaker 1: Government came in and decided to overturn and abolish the
Speaker 1: death penalty in Australia, did you ever think that that
Speaker 1: could mean that he would be released? Was that a
Speaker 1: fear of yours?
Speaker 4: Well, the answer is there is yes, because it hasn't
Speaker 4: been a practice for decades where someone has been kept
Speaker 4: in jail for fifty years, for forty years, and with
Speaker 4: the parole war system as it was back in the seventies,
Speaker 4: as I knew it, I mean, people were being let
Speaker 4: out after after shorter periods, and perhaps I thought they
Speaker 4: should have had And as far as Bartholemy was concerned,
Speaker 4: I would have seen him stay there for twenty five years.
Speaker 4: In fact, if they had executed the death party, I
Speaker 4: wouldn't have I would have gone, had to be in
Speaker 4: the pub by myself. You know. It's just just my
Speaker 4: personal attitude. It was at the time. It still is.
Speaker 4: People don't agree with death penalties anymore. But in my mind,
Speaker 4: after a number of homicides that I've been through and
Speaker 4: intent shown by the killers, I just think there's room
Speaker 4: to put some of these killers to waste.
Speaker 1: So he ended up getting out after about eight years.
Speaker 1: Do you remember finding out about that? How did you feel?
Speaker 4: I can't really tell you in words because it would
Speaker 4: be rude. Yeah, yeah, it's I got a call from
Speaker 4: him when he was he spent eight years in jail.
Speaker 4: Some years during that time, I got a call from
Speaker 4: the Atler Labor Prison that he wanted a pair of
Speaker 4: his shoes footwear returned to him. So by appointment, and
Speaker 4: I went to the Outler with his shoes, and I
Speaker 4: was shown to a room, a table and two chairs.
Speaker 4: He said on one so, and I said on the other,
Speaker 4: and prison officers stood at the background, keeping an eye
Speaker 4: on things. And I said, I believe it's what you're
Speaker 4: after there was no nice It isn't old. I just
Speaker 4: treated him coolly. I might have said, how you going anyway?
Speaker 4: I said, I believe this is what you're actual? He
Speaker 4: said yes. I said, okay, here, I like to do
Speaker 4: the sign for these. He signed for them, and then
Speaker 4: he said, I suppose you want to know why I
Speaker 4: wanted to cool a wife? And I said, I know
Speaker 4: all I need to know about you, missed about on
Speaker 4: you and none of us. Good thank you very much, goodbye,
Speaker 4: and I left him sitting. He was sort of coming
Speaker 4: into the chair looking for a nice, friendly chat. I
Speaker 4: cut him short.
Speaker 1: What sounds like he wanted to kind of confess his
Speaker 1: but you just didn't give him the chance. You didn't
Speaker 1: want to, You didn't want to hear it.
Speaker 4: Well, I knew all I needed to know, and I
Speaker 4: told him I knew all I needed to know, and
Speaker 4: so did the court.
Speaker 1: Once he was released, eventually he moved States, went by
Speaker 1: a different name, kind of just blended into Australian society
Speaker 1: and we didn't really hear about him for a very
Speaker 1: long time until a journalist named Craig came knocking. Had
Speaker 1: you heard about him before? Craig uncovered his new life.
Speaker 4: Well, I knew he had changed his name and he'd
Speaker 4: moved to Victoria. I knew that he had partnered with
Speaker 4: a woman who had several children, and a number of
Speaker 4: those children were of or about the age of his
Speaker 4: own children that he'd killed.
Speaker 1: And I guess I do know how that made you feel.
Speaker 1: But please put it into words, knowing that he had
Speaker 1: a second chance at life with seven kids as well,
Speaker 1: the same amount that he murdered.
Speaker 4: Look, hate Triblewood. It's a terrible experience. I won't admit
Speaker 4: to hating him, But what I do wish is that
Speaker 4: the courts took a stronger approach to his future. Whether
Speaker 4: I left him in jahf for thirty years or if
Speaker 4: they'd carried out the death penality. Either way it would
Speaker 4: have been better than what the outcome was. As far
Speaker 4: as I'm the concerned, justice wasn't done properly.
Speaker 1: Craig mentioned that those crime scene photos that you said
Speaker 1: you've got in front of you, you can't bear to
Speaker 1: get rid of them. Why is that?
Speaker 4: No, Okay, I've got them on my lap at the moment.
Speaker 4: I've had a look at them this morning. No, Well,
Speaker 4: I've got to admit I've got most of the investigations
Speaker 4: that I've involved in about seventy one homicides. I have
Speaker 4: retained a library with photographs at my age of eighty
Speaker 4: five coming up. I've got to think work I do
Speaker 4: with them leaves them.
Speaker 1: Lying around the some poor soul to find.
Speaker 4: I think the Police Historical Society might be the place
Speaker 4: for them to go and then make it a sorry.
Speaker 4: Whether they want to shred them, burn them or hang
Speaker 4: on to them, but they are of historical value. If
Speaker 4: you've got a crime scene nine like mine.
Speaker 1: You know, Alan, why don't you think more Australians know
Speaker 1: about these murders about Buffalomew? He seems to have kind
Speaker 1: of slipped through the cracks in terms of you know,
Speaker 1: we all know who Ivan Malatt is, we all know
Speaker 1: all these murderers through time, but I don't think many
Speaker 1: people know Clifford Buffalomew's name or Clifford Palmer.
Speaker 4: No, it's I mean it's come up over the years.
Speaker 4: Well it's fifty four years since the murder. It's come up.
Speaker 4: I've been contracted a few times over the years. But
Speaker 4: I mean, you've got to compare this with the other
Speaker 4: murders that have occurred in South which are horrendous as well,
Speaker 4: and in the state, and they compete the stories from overseas.
Speaker 4: But I think people should remo be reminded from time
Speaker 4: to time about what can happen in this in our
Speaker 4: state and our city country towns, and to be mindful
Speaker 4: of people with whom you communicate with.
Speaker 1: Craig, We've heard from former detective Allen Arthur. But to close,
Speaker 1: I'd like to ask you, do you think that someone
Speaker 1: could reinvent themselves to this extent today? Say they committed
Speaker 1: a crime, they're given a new identity, could they get
Speaker 1: away with it in twenty twenty five.
Speaker 2: Not if they committed a crime like this, Absolutely not,
Speaker 2: that's the difference. Yes, if you've committed even a small
Speaker 2: leader that's not publicized, maybe you could reinvent yourself, become
Speaker 2: a different person and there's no real trace of what
Speaker 2: you've done. But the murder of this magnitude, no way.
Speaker 2: The publicity would be enormous today. Wherever you went, you'd
Speaker 2: be found, you'd have to leave the country.
Speaker 1: I think I would argue that even if you committed
Speaker 1: murder and it wasn't overly publicized, we now have access
Speaker 1: to the databases. The criminal database is the court databases,
Speaker 1: so we can google people's names. We can find things
Speaker 1: out on social media that we couldn't back then.
Speaker 2: Quite true, you had to go to a public library
Speaker 2: and so it's through dusty documents. If you're lucky to
Speaker 2: find anything back then, you were a little hope. So yes,
Speaker 2: we have for incredible access these days. I don't think
Speaker 2: it'd be possible.
Speaker 1: Thanks to Craig and Alan for helping us to tell
Speaker 1: this story. If you couldn't turn off this episode and
Speaker 1: liked hearing from two voices, let us know. Send us
Speaker 1: an email at true Crime at mamma Mia dot com
Speaker 1: dot au, or use the link in our show notes
Speaker 1: to send us a voice note. True Crime Conversations is
Speaker 1: a mum of mea podcast hosted and produced by me
Speaker 1: Jemma Bath and Talie Blackman, with audio design by Jacob Brown.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for listening. I'll be back next week
Speaker 1: with another True Crime Conversation.