But what actually happened on this occasion? What caused Richard to be snatched in such a savage way when other boys had been wooed so calmly and easily. More than likely the mix of people who were involved was different from usual and that combination caused them to act differently. We knew that von Einem had a beat, which involved driving between the city and Scotty’s Motel looking for hitchhikers. He would do this alone or with another person. We knew that von Einem and B would pick up hitchhikers and offer them drugs or spike their drinks. We also believed von Einem used transsexuals and transvestites. A man and a woman in a car would be less threatening to hitchhikers than two men in a car.
Richard Kelvin, however, was different. He was not seduced into a car, he was physically forced into one.
In my mind, the dog collar was the catalyst. Richard Kelvin was a young, fit boy and would have been attractive to homosexuals. Normally, homosexuals would not approach him because they would sense his distaste for homosexuality, but when a group gets together, people act differently. They can form a pack that roams together. Whether or not the pack comprises men or women, they can behave more aggressively in some situations than if they were alone. When von Einem was by himself he appeared gentle — until he had people under his control.
Control of people who became von Einem’s prey was achieved through drugs. On that Sunday night he was not alone, and, rather than being with just one other person, he was probably with two or three others. That number of people would be needed to force someone into a car. As police officers, we know just how hard it is to put an arrested person into a police car if that person does not want to get in.
It was a weekend and most likely they had drugs in their system. The drugs may have been alcohol, hypnotics or marijuana but most likely it was a combination of drugs. Either they were getting over them from their use on the weekend or they had come together and taken a fresh lot. This pack was out to play and when they had finished socialising they were ready to hunt for their prey. They were using von Einem’s beat, which included North Adelaide. They knew people would be going to the restaurants and shops at six o’clock on a Sunday night. Unfortunately, fate put Richard Kelvin in the vicinity of this pack as they cruised O’Connell Street and the dog collar Richard wore that night activated their ‘smell of blood’. From then on their hunt was uncontrollable.
Brian Martin, the senior crown prosecutor, couldn’t prove this, though. The scenario was very likely but prosecutors have to present evidence that is acceptable to courts. Supposition was not enough. Brian was intending to present to the court people who had been picked up by von Einem and drugged and abused by him. But he knew there would be difficulties with a legal concept which relates to that specific type of evidence. The type of evidence is called circumstantial, and the legal concept was called similar fact evidence. Our case relied on evidence which suggested that von Einem was with Richard Kelvin and evidence from witnesses saying that Richard would not go with strangers.
Brian Martin was going to introduce evidence to show that von Einem acted in such a way that a jury could conclude that he was the person who picked up Richard Kelvin. He could prove that von Einem picked up boys and drugged them with the same type of drugs that were found in Richard Kelvin. The boys we found were either given a Mickey Finn or they took the drugs voluntarily, for kicks.
However, the majority of the boys we found were given Rohypnol but we couldn’t prove that Richard had been given that particular drug. This presented additional problems. George, the hitchhiker, on the other hand, was given Mandrax, and that was the same drug given to Richard Kelvin.
Richard Kelvin would not have taken the drugs voluntarily, but they may have been in drinks that he was given. There were similarities there. Richard Kelvin was anally abused. This fact presented similarities with other boys. Richard Kelvin was beaten during his captivity and other boys who gave us statements about von Einem were not beaten. This presented differences, which a defence team could use; perhaps the bruises on his body resulted from his being beaten to make him take the drugs, but this was all speculation.
The differences between the boys who were drugged, abused and let go and Richard Kelvin, were going to present difficulties for Brian Martin. Our evidence of similar acts was weak, but he was going to try. The law of evidence was strict and Brian would have to use all of his persuasive skills to get that evidence accepted by a judge in a court. However, to a lay person, von Einem’s actions showed he was a person who picked up, drugged and abused boys. That makes him a very good suspect to be a person who picked up, drugged, abused and killed boys.
We had a boy who was abducted on a Sunday. That was 5 June 1983. We could
