Detective Sergeants Wayne Newman and David Rae, while building a behavioural profile of Derek Percy, were aware that to best advance the Stilwell inquest they needed to look not just at the Tuohy case but also at the Beaumonts, Redston and Wanda Beach cases. Given clearance by Melbourne Coroner Graeme Johnstone to gather that evidence in order to show behavioural patterns, they now awaited a date to be set for that inquest.
Acting on a tip-off, in June 2007 police obtained a warrant to seize the contents of a lock-up at a South Melbourne warehouse. They were amazed at what they found: volumes of sick stories and hundreds of sordid jottings contained in more than thirty boxes. It was material that Percy had penned from prison, even more graphic than that which Newman and Rae had previously read. At the end of August, Magistrate Belinda Wallington gave them permission to interview Percy about what they had found in the warehouse.
The media circled and speculation was rife. But despite the rumours, a cartoon found in the warehouse, headlined 'Wicked Wanda' did not refer to the Wanda Beach murders; like other material police found in his possession, it had been torn from the pages of a girlie magazine. Razor blades he had put in storage were not from the same batch as those used in the Simon Brook murder; Percy had used them in prison to fashion model boats.
Wayne Newman was extremely guarded when he spoke to me about what was found in the warehouse; understandable reticence, given that the Linda Stilwell inquest is yet to be heard. 'Much of what we found was run of the mill paperwork, but other items warranted our further investigation,' he said.
'What sort of other material was it?'
'I'm not at liberty to discuss that. There was nothing that we found in the warehouse to indicate that it was put there recently. It is Percy's own paperwork that he has accumulated in prison, much as we would accumulate material and then store it in our shed. Prisons have organisations to send material out but perhaps the material that left correctional institutions was not as closely scrutinised in the 1970s as it is today.' He won't comment beyond this on how Percy was allowed to continue writing such filthy material and how he managed to get it past prison authorities.
Sex offenders are sometimes encouraged to write down fantasies as part of their therapeutic process, to see if their fantasies have changed or become less intense, but Percy is not part of any such process and prisoners are not allowed to collect pornographic material, even if they have written it themselves. Former Victorian Police Commissioner Christine Nixon gave an enigmatic response when reporters grilled her on the subject. 'The piece of information that came to us is significant,' she said, 'and may lead to many, many matters being dealt with, but that's a matter of investigation . . .'
Wayne Newman would not elucidate what that information is, but what is absolutely certain is that an answer is required about how that material got out of prison, unchallenged. Someone needs to furnish an answer to that question.
I had hoped to meet Newman in early 2008 but a scheduled interview with him stalls when I get to Melbourne. He no longer wishes to talk to me, he says, abruptly and unapologetically, on the telephone. There is an inquest coming up, he says, though he does not yet have a firm start date. He cannot give personal or professional opinions of Percy nor can he in any way cloud the memories of witnesses. Another call to Newman on 21 November to enquire as to the status of that inquest and whether startling new evidence will be presented before it evokes an equally blunt response framed in stiff police language. 'We found material believed to belong to Mr Percy which warranted further questioning regarding the Stilwell matter. It's new evidence because it's not evidence that has been yet held before the court,' he tells me.
'Yes, I understand. But is it new evidence that has never been aired before, as in new material you have found placing Percy at Stilwell's abduction site, or is it circumstantial evidence that you have put together that has been aired in news reports?'
'I can't answer that.'
'You can't tell me if you have new evidence?'
'It's new evidence. It's all new.'
'So it's startling new evidence that no one has seen before?'
'It hasn't been aired before the court. I don't know what else to say to you.' We are going around in Pythonesque circles. I thank him for his time and place a call to David Rae, who is more forthcoming.
'Hopefully the inquest will be really worthwhile, and all the evidence we have will be packaged together for that. But there is no startling new evidence, as such.'
I think about what Gary Stilwell told me: that it was Percy's MO to lure a child away. But as much as there are chilling similarities between the missing and murdered children, there are differences, too. Linda Stilwell's body has not been found. The Beaumont children have not been found. If Percy is responsible for all four murders, did he have opportunity to take them further, to hide their bodies in dense bushland where they would not easily be discovered, or to dispose of them at sea? The latter, despite Percy's competence as a sailor, seems unrealistic; the chances of being seen disposing of bodies at sea is very high. It is far more likely that, like Yvonne Tuohy, they have been tossed away in the scrub, somewhere. The touring maps found in Percy's belongings prove he did a reconnoitre of areas, and he had ample time while driving on his own, to find isolated bush tracks. The other victims – Schmidt, Sharrock, Brook, Redston and his known victim, Yvonne Tuohy – were all found within twenty-four hours of their abductions. None was afforded the decency of a bush grave and Schmidt and Sharrock's bodies were hastily covered with a light doona of sand that shifted during the night. The probability of the bodies of all five victims being found was extremely high. Did their killer tire of the game shortly after their deaths, no longer interested in lingering with the bodies? Once his overwhelming urge was sated, was he frightened of being discovered, so leaving them behind at the scene with not a backward glance? Was he certain that he would get away with murder, and that there was therefore no need to hide them?