# Will they catch Malcolm Naden?



## awg (10 December 2011)

I am very familiar with the S.E Barrington tops region.

I also have some familiarity with the forest region that police are hunting Naden now.

In this area, there is an abundance of pigs, deer, roos, rabbits and trout.

The forest trees and plants have much bush tucker if you know.

This region is incredibly rugged and perfect for avoiding capture imo

The state forests run in a continuous unbroken strip from Barringtons to Coffs, apart from a couple of kilometres where you have to cross Thunderbolts Way.

Ludwig Leichardt, the explorer, spent 3 weeks, in a hollow tree due to bad weather

Naden must have supreme bush skills.

I do not think they will be able to track him, as he can use the river valleys. If he is as well prepared as it seems, he will have had his escape route planned

Also, from talking to some people that live up in the isolated areas around Nowendoc and Nundle, there is an awful lot of "hillbillies" up there, who have no love whatsover for the law.

The local marijuana growers will be really annoyed.

Some of the guys I know that go pig-shooting up there, are serious hardnuts.

With a $250k reward, I think these "bounty-hunters" will be his biggest worry


----------



## Calliope (10 December 2011)

He reminds me of Jimmy Governor's foray into the bush. When Jimmy was captured he said;

"This f****n bush-ranging is not all its f****n cracked up to be."

A jail cell for Naden would be a luxury compared to the life he is living, but to him freedom is more important.


----------



## banco (10 December 2011)

He'll probably get sick or injured eventually (although he might just end up dying a lonely death rather than being captured).


----------



## Calliope (11 December 2011)

banco said:


> He'll probably get sick or injured eventually (although he might just end up dying a lonely death rather than being captured).






> One local said: ''The police seem to be taking an American approach - throw in lots of people and use a lot of technology. But I'm not sure that's the right thing here. I think they have missed him.''

















Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/how-police-stumbled-on-fugitive-20111210-1oooz.html#ixzz1gB2TIiPO


----------



## awg (13 December 2011)

I dont know how much publicity this case has got previously outside NSW.

Have followed this closely, as I have a remote property that has been vandalised and thieved...they have no idea what might happen if I ever catch anyone.:chainsaw:

Naden is wanted over the alleged murder and dissaperance of 2 of his female relatives from Dubbo in 2005

They later found he had been living in Dubbo Zoo for 12 months, in the animals lairs, eating their food.

For the last 3 years, it has been well known he has been in the Gloucester district, as his manner of thefts is discreet, with no vandalism.

They say they have 60 specialist police and 2 helicopters.

If he slipped past them into the really thick brush, they will be needing more than that


----------



## Calliope (15 December 2011)

The hunt continues.



> THE hunt for one of Australia''s most wanted fugitive Malcolm Naden is no longer just a police search - it's war.
> Officers won't say as much but the resources they're throwing into the operation reveal this is a long, long way from an ordinary manhunt, The Daily Telegraph reported.
> Elite officers armed with the same weaponry used by army special forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, helicopters with sniper platforms, a command post full of hi-tech communications equipment - in just one week the tiny township of Nowendoc has been turned into a full-blown military camp.










Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/hi-...en/story-e6frfkvr-1226222369629#ixzz1gYTE4JW2


----------



## Macquack (15 December 2011)

Calliope said:


> The hunt continues.
> 
> 
> THE hunt for one of Australia''s most wanted fugitive Malcolm Naden is no longer just a police search - *it's war*.




Looks like Malcolm Nader is NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell's answer to Osama Bin Laden.


----------



## quadfin (16 December 2011)

awg said:


> I dont know how much publicity this case has got previously outside NSW.
> 
> Have followed this closely, as I have a remote property that has been vandalised and thieved...they have no idea what might happen if I ever catch anyone.:chainsaw:
> 
> ...





Simple response co ordinate with the NPWS to do a controlled burn off in a circular pattern around the area he was last sighted in, smoke him out or burn him alive , Rapist & murderer & unsuccessful cop killer who cares, firebomb the area. Will save the taxpayer in gaol living costs.


----------



## prawn_86 (16 December 2011)

quadfin said:


> . Will save the taxpayer in gaol living costs.




LOL and this isn't going to cost anything doing all that is it? WHatever happened to innocent before proven guilty?

Oh how the media can distort things to make a story


----------



## quadfin (16 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> LOL and this isn't going to cost anything doing all that is it? WHatever happened to innocent before proven guilty?
> 
> Oh how the media can distort things to make a story




murderer plus murderer of family plus kiddie fiddler they are the facts of the accused, WHY did he run cause he is guilty, wonder how you would feel prawn if it was your daughter. Still if he stuck around plead guilty he would probably be close to parole now, the law is a joke.   
they know where he is send in the SAS for a training exercise.


----------



## prawn_86 (16 December 2011)

quadfin said:


> murderer plus murderer of family plus kiddie fiddler they are the facts of the accused, WHY did he run cause he is guilty, wonder how you would feel prawn if it was your daughter. Still if he stuck around plead guilty he would probably be close to parole now, the law is a joke.
> they know where he is send in the SAS for a training exercise.




I have no idea about this at all, the first i heard was 2 weeks ago. But as an impartial observer can you please show me the evidence that *proves* he is a murderer? I'm not saying he is or isn't because i don't know.

So by your theory, if you refuse the police something then you are guilty. If the police rocked up to your place without a warrant asking to search it would you let them? Remember if you dont you're already guilty...


----------



## quadfin (16 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> I have no idea about this at all, the first i heard was 2 weeks ago. But as an impartial observer can you please show me the evidence that *proves* he is a murderer? I'm not saying he is or isn't because i don't know.
> 
> So by your theory, if you refuse the police something then you are guilty. If the police rocked up to your place without a warrant asking to search it would you let them? Remember if you dont you're already guilty...




Asio & the police can search my home my computer my financial statements tomorrow if they want all without a warrant. I would let them as i'm not guilty of anything
Plus your innocent man has now tried to kill a copper & failed

"Naden, 38, on the run since 2005, is wanted over the death of two women in Dubbo, the sexual assault of a schoolgirl and, following a failed attempt to catch him last Wednesday, the shooting of a police officer."

Prawn this is the man whose rights your defending, personally set the bush on fire, another scumbag that should not breath

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...t-bounty-hunters/story-e6frf7jx-1226219607211

http://www.news-mail.com.au/story/2011/12/16/manhunt-ramping-up-for-suspect-on-the-run/


----------



## prawn_86 (16 December 2011)

quadfin said:


> Asio & the police can search my home my computer my financial statements tomorrow if they want all without a warrant. I would let them as i'm not guilty of anything




It's attitudes like that that has turned us into the nanny state in which we now live. 

Where do you draw the line of innocent versus perceived innocence? Would you be happy for the police to satellite monitor your car and then send you a bill every time you speed?


----------



## Knobby22 (17 December 2011)

It all reminds me of the movie "The Fugitive".


----------



## quadfin (17 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> It's attitudes like that that has turned us into the nanny state in which we now live.
> 
> Where do you draw the line of innocent versus perceived innocence? Would you be happy for the police to satellite monitor your car and then send you a bill every time you speed?




Wow my attitude to criminals has turned us into a nanny state, i dont care what anyone does with there money or their life, but criminals including the white collar ones should have sentences increased massively.

Gees prawn, a conspiracy theory in response to the rights of a very dodgy individual, you might be one of these nutters who would invite a rapist & murderer in for a cup of tea, as somehow his innocent until proven guilty rights have some how been infringed.

As i said before prawn, if it was your daughter who was killed???????????


----------



## prawn_86 (17 December 2011)

quadfin said:


> Wow my attitude to criminals has turned us into a nanny state, i dont care what anyone does with there money or their life, but criminals including the white collar ones should have sentences increased massively.
> 
> Gees prawn, a conspiracy theory in response to the rights of a very dodgy individual, you might be one of these nutters who would invite a rapist & murderer in for a cup of tea, as somehow his innocent until proven guilty rights have some how been infringed.
> 
> As i said before prawn, if it was your daughter who was killed???????????




As i said, i do not *KNOW* he committed these crimes. If you can prove it please provide the evidence and then i will change my opinion. Until I (or the legal system, which admittedly probably isn't as harsh as it should be) *know* that he committed these cimes he is permitted to the assumption of innocence.

I agree that he seems dodgy and it doesn't look good for him, but i do not know for sure that he has committed the crimes he has been accused of. 

Out of interest, as per my previous question, would you let the cops satellite track your speed limit? If you're never guilty of speeding you have nothing to hide right? Or what about search you publicly at a train station? I'm guessing you have never broken a law in your life?

The whole point i'm trying to get at here is that the media have a massive influence on the presumed assumption of evidence. This man hasn't gone to trial yet but i bet >80% of the population already think he is guilty.

And; the 'i have nothing to hide' attitude is erroding our freedoms. IE - terrosism suspects being able to be detained without charge etc etc


----------



## quadfin (17 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> As i said, i do not *KNOW* he committed these crimes. If you can prove it please provide the evidence and then i will change my opinion. Until I (or the legal system, which admittedly probably isn't as harsh as it should be) *know* that he committed these cimes he is permitted to the assumption of innocence.
> 
> I agree that he seems dodgy and it doesn't look good for him, but i do not know for sure that he has committed the crimes he has been accused of.
> 
> ...




Gees prawn you ask me to answer your conspiracy theory you have avoided  several questions to promote your agenda its turning into lecture from you rather than debate

1)prawn "but i do not know for sure that he has committed the crimes he has been accused of" why did he disappear, why is he running?????, maybe read some more about it before you get an opinion.
2) satellite tracking of cars, bring it on the worse i ever do is 10-15kms over will stopp the idiots doing 40km over
3) public search at a train station, no worries bring it on, i have nothing to hide, my search would take 2 mins a criminal or terrorist may take longer
4)terrorism suspects i would go further detain them indefinitely, or make changes to the law, religious wackos are different to drug dealers, the police cannot wait for an act to be committed

None of what you have presented will interfere with a law abiding citizen just offer more protection to scumbags who should be removed from the earth as oxygen theives


----------



## Bill M (17 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> I have no idea about this at all, the first i heard was 2 weeks ago. But as an impartial observer can you please show me the evidence that *proves* he is a murderer? I'm not saying he is or isn't because i don't know.



The point is that the Police went to a site where they wanted to apprehend the said fugitive. During this time somebody fired at the Police wounding an Officer. Whether that person is Naden or not is not important now, what is important is that we now have somebody out there who wants to be a cop killer. Cop killers should be hunted down and apprehended at all cost, nobody should get away with that.



> So by your theory, if you refuse the police something then you are guilty.



 It is no different than a random breath test or a vehicle check. You can pull over and do the test or you can attempt to drive off at high speed with complete disregard to everybody's safety and the law. If the Police say stop you must do so, no ifs no buts, they need to do their job. So back to this guy who shot the cop, they went there to apprehend somebody for questioning, why did he shoot the cop and then run rather than go in for some questioning? *That shooter is now a criminal for sure.*



> what about search you publicly at a train station? I'm guessing you have never broken a law in your life?



I have been searched publicly by customs officers at the airport on my way home, I don't care I got nothing to hide. I think it is a good idea that they do their job to try and stop drug trafficking don't you? Same thing at Random Breath Tests or searching dudes for drugs at train stations, *who cares if you nothing to hide?*



> And; the 'i have nothing to hide' attitude is erroding our freedoms. IE - terrosism suspects being able to be detained without charge etc etc



Mate I don't we do enough about crime here. Australia has some of the most pathetic sentencing laws I have ever seen in my life. The more surveillance, the more arrests and more harsher penalties for the persons that wish to commit crimes the better I say. Even when caught and proven guilty in court criminals get very light sentences, the Australian justice system is a joke.


----------



## awg (17 December 2011)

Bill M said:


> The point is that the Police went to a site where they wanted to apprehend the said fugitive. During this time somebody fired at the Police wounding an Officer. Whether that person is Naden or not is not important now, what is important is that we now have somebody out there who wants to be a cop killer. Cop killers should be hunted down and apprehended at all cost, nobody should get away with that.




This fact will be occupying the mind of the police, and their commanders, one would expect. 

I'm not sure how you would negate the risk of him shooting you, enough to allow the sort of on the ground searching they need.
	

		
			
		

		
	





The attached maps show what they are up against.

The area I believe they located him is Mares Run just off Thunderbolts Way, to the South East of Nowendoc


----------



## quadfin (17 December 2011)

16 men,4 teams of 4 dropped at the points of compass coverage to centre of search area, simple,no escape.
 private operators would have him in a week. or as i said before use the sas for a training exercise.
Can you bounty hunt in NSW???


----------



## prawn_86 (17 December 2011)

I'm not saying he is or isn't guilty, he most probably is, but i dont know that so i'm not going to say that he is.

With regards to personal searches etc i think we all have a basic right of innocence. Sniffer dogs for example are not accurate >70% of the time yet they still get used on the premise that they deter people. Thats like saying an officer should have the right to detain someone just because the officer 'thought' that person might commit a crime. A very slippery slope against personal freedoms imo. I do not trust the law makers or the enforcers enough that i am happy to give away my personal rights/freedoms for. The thing that comes next is that verbally criticising governments etc will be made illegal and you will be able to be detained for speaking out against those in power...

One thing i do agree on is that penalties for those *proven guilty* are much too leniant. But remember, if you were arrested/detained for questioning for a crime you didnt commit, you would want the presumption of innocennce also


----------



## Julia (17 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> And; the 'i have nothing to hide' attitude is erroding our freedoms. IE - terrosism suspects being able to be detained without charge etc etc



What do you suggest as an alternative?  Wait until they've blown up the Sydney Harbour Bridge just as one example, killing hundreds of people.
Viz the recent case where they had a plan to kill as many soldiers as possible at Holsworthy.  Would you prefer that our laws had allowed them to do it, so you could then justifiably say "oh goodness, they really did mean harm, didn't they"!


----------



## prawn_86 (17 December 2011)

Julia said:


> What do you suggest as an alternative?  Wait until they've blown up the Sydney Harbour Bridge just as one example, killing hundreds of people.
> Viz the recent case where they had a plan to kill as many soldiers as possible at Holsworthy.  Would you prefer that our laws had allowed them to do it, so you could then justifiably say "oh goodness, they really did mean harm, didn't they"!




No, i'm saying if you can *prove* something, be it actions or intent, then that is fine. Being able to be detained indefenitely without charge is against all basic human rights,. Its like me coming into your home, taking you to prison and saying "oh yeh, you're going to think about committing a crime in a couple years time so we thought we would stop you now" and holding you there without a charge 

I know nothing about this Malcolm Naden guy apart from what i have seen on the news, and all the media outlets are already painting him as guilty so it is unlikely he would be able to get a fair trial, *which under our laws he is entitled to*. As i have said, his actions do look suspicious but that is not for me, or the media, to decide imo. I can form an opinion, bu it will be just an opinion ntil i have all the facts on the table.

I'm amazed by how many members are happy to give away their freedoms to  governments/police forces that have repeatedly proven throughout history that they have no interest in supporting the 'common mans' rights. The protestors in Syria right now are trying to rise up from an oppresive government and being killed for it but if they have done nothing wrong i suppose its ok for government forces to shoot them or raid their houses and kidnap them so long as that is within the law?


----------



## Julia (17 December 2011)

Oh, for heaven's sake, Prawn, comparing what is happening in Syria with our rights here in Australia, is just silly.

I can only speak for myself, but I'm pretty happy with my rights in this country.
Happy to do a breath test in case I might be a danger to other road users.
Happy to have Customs search me as thoroughly as they wish when I come into the country. etc etc

You say it's OK for people to be detained if it is PROVEN that they mean or intend harm.
What about the period between a well founded suspicion of their harmful intent and the gathering of evidence to prove this? 

Are you quite happy for them to remain at large?

I have already given the example of the recent Holsworthy case.  You have declined to answer this.


----------



## prawn_86 (18 December 2011)

Julia said:


> Happy to have Customs search me as thoroughly as they wish when I come into the country. etc etc




Even to be strip searched? I know of girls at music festivals NOT carrying drugs who have been strip searched when a sniffer dog sat next to them



Julia said:


> What about the period between a well founded suspicion of their harmful intent and the gathering of evidence to prove this?
> 
> Are you quite happy for them to remain at large?
> 
> I have already given the example of the recent Holsworthy case.  You have declined to answer this.




No, they should be able to be detained for the usual amount of time without facing a charge, which i think is usually 48 hours. What makes them different to any other criminal? Or should all suspected criminals be able to be held indefinetely without charge or evidence presented to a court?


----------



## Knobby22 (18 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> No, they should be able to be detained for the usual amount of time without facing a charge, which i think is usually 48 hours. What makes them different to any other criminal? Or should all suspected criminals be able to be held indefinetely without charge or evidence presented to a court?




I have no problem with that. My neighbour ran the terrorism squad. When she caught them (a different lot) she had evidence everywhere and they all got long terms in jail. 48 hours is fair to be held without charge, surely be then if they are planning terrorism then there will be some evidence to charge them with. I have no problem with them being ruthless in their duty, as long as they are fair.  

Back to Malcolm Naden, what a lousy name, "Malcolm" is a name that demands rebellion, maybe that is why he turned bad?   On the other hand he could have gone the other way and become Prime Minister.


----------



## prawn_86 (18 December 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> I have no problem with that. My neighbour ran the terrorism squad. When she caught them (a different lot) she had evidence everywhere and they all got long terms in jail. 48 hours is fair to be held without charge, surely be then if they are planning terrorism then there will be some evidence to charge them with. I have no problem with them being ruthless in their duty, as long as they are fair.




Exactly, 48 hours (or whatever limit is set) is fair within the laws, but to hold someone without charge for as long as you feel like is against basic human rights imo.


----------



## quadfin (18 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> Exactly, 48 hours (or whatever limit is set) is fair within the laws, but to hold someone without charge for as long as you feel like is against basic human rights imo.




julia & i have made some points prawn that you refuse to answer, than go off again.

Drug importation networks could involve 2 years of investigation whilst allowing drugs to be released into the drug market, are you PRAWN suggesting society is better off allowing terrorists to only be held for 48 hours, hopefully their civil rights will be respected & your family can be amongst the carnage, maybe than you will sing a different tune


----------



## prawn_86 (18 December 2011)

quadfin said:


> julia & i have made some points prawn that you refuse to answer, than go off again.
> 
> Drug importation networks could involve 2 years of investigation whilst allowing drugs to be released into the drug market, are you PRAWN suggesting society is better off allowing terrorists to only be held for 48 hours, hopefully their civil rights will be respected & your family can be amongst the carnage, maybe than you will sing a different tune




With regards to if it was my family, obviously i would have more of an idea about the situation. In that case I would have more suspicions and knowledge and then of course i would have a different opinon as to this particular crime. As it stands now i am just an impartial observer to this case.

I'm suggesting that a fair society should have a limit as to how long someone can be detained without charge. So yes if a 'terrorist' is detained and the authorities cannot come up with information to convince a judge for an official arrest within that given time period, yes the suspect should be released. My whole point is that if someone is arrested they have to know what they are being arrested for, IE - there has to be evidence not just a 'hunch'

Here's one for you then, what if 'terrorists' were using your land and you were detained on suspicion of being involved but not charged and not told why you were being detained? How long would you happily be detained without charge?

Also as per ASF posting guidelines, please note that any malicious posts attacking members personally will be removed


----------



## Julia (18 December 2011)

quadfin said:


> hopefully their civil rights will be respected & your family can be amongst the carnage,



I just want to be clear that in no way do I want to be associated with the above remark.


----------



## quadfin (21 December 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> Here's one for you then, what if 'terrorists' were using your land and you were detained on suspicion of being involved but not charged and not told why you were being detained? How long would you happily be detained without charge?
> 
> Also as per ASF posting guidelines, please note that any malicious posts attacking members personally will be removed




prawn i find your opinion malicious as you do mine,,,, moderation does not exist in society nor should it online. back to your question,

Simple prawn if i was caught up in something i was innocent of, how ever long it takes whatever access they want, phones computers bank accounts, I have nothing to hide, i would demand good food.


----------



## Macquack (21 December 2011)

quadfin said:


> Simple prawn if i was caught up in something i was innocent of, how ever long it takes whatever access they want, phones computers bank accounts, I have nothing to hide, i would demand good food.




The Nazi's liked people with your attitude.

The Jews were innocent and look what happened to them.


----------



## Ageo (23 December 2011)

Not sure where this 250k bounty is as they just temporarily banned a few forests for us to hunt in... (restricted game license)


----------



## awg (23 December 2011)

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...ouse-in-niangala/story-e6freuzi-1226228911742

Surely they can nail him now, if they didnt pin him down after this latest encounter, they would have been logistically unprepared. It must only be a matter of time.

For the police, I am sure however they must still proceed on the basis he is armed and will shoot to kill rather than be taken

One of his biggest problems for him is that he would be wary to start fire without risk of detection.

It is going to be a bit weird up their over Xmas, as the area gets an influx of campers, prospectors, pig-hunters etc and out-of-towners with rural properties 

Those hill are full of gold, with many abandoned mines, some only recently.
There is new interest with high gold prices. 
There is an abandoned mine in the deep rainforest at the headwaters of the Karuah River, Whispering Gully, a trek is required, I have been wanting to get up there for a long time.

As well as gold .."The hills have eyes"..I dunno what would happen legally if you just shot him on sight, I imagine their would be some that might. (check the Wes Craven movie)

Some hunters use private property with permission of the owners as wild dogs and pigs are are a problem.

I worked with a fellow for several years that was from that region and a very keen pigdogger. He was of Aboriginal descent, took great interest in the old skills of his people, a survivalist and martial artist. Reminds me of Naden even in appearance. He used to hunt pigs and sell the carcasses for pet food, as a leisure pursuit, Im not sure it was legal.

Although I greatly admire his bush skills, I hope they get him. 
Apart from anything else, I detest stealing from remote properties


----------



## awg (22 March 2012)

Thankfully he has been captured.

My understanding is police had set up surveilance devices including infra-red cameras, at a number of isolated and not permananently occupied buildings that Naden was known to have entered on multiple occassions. 

They also would probably have formed a very extensive knowledge and surveilance of the bush trails in the area.

That is what I would have done anyway


----------



## alpharipper (22 March 2012)

prawn_86 said:


> As i said, i do not *KNOW* he committed these crimes. If you can prove it please provide the evidence and then i will change my opinion. Until I (or the legal system, which admittedly probably isn't as harsh as it should be) *know* that he committed these cimes he is permitted to the assumption of innocence.
> 
> I agree that he seems dodgy and it doesn't look good for him, but i do not know for sure that he has committed the crimes he has been accused of.
> 
> ...





Well only new here but caught this thread and will offer my opinion. Prawn you are talkig out of your you know what. 

As a relation to the murdered there is evidence that the public has not been given. He was wanted as DNA, finger prints were on the person, that is all I can say, and guess what they were his. 

He had been in trouble prior. The 15 year old that he touched also identified him. This is enough to say he is guilty. What is wrong with this country and the law makers, and idiots like forum posters is that you treat everyone as innocent before proven guilty.  I find it hard to justify this and in past cases we have seen shooting on mass scales where the shooter in innocent, ??? How can this be when they were witnessed doing the act and caught in the act. 

I dont always agree that all are guilty and need there day in court, but just sometimes they should be locked up. 

This monster has done this, the family has seen the evidence. The media do blow it up, but at the end of the day the police have more evidence that proves and will prove the guilt of this man.

Sometimes you should consider what you write. 

Anyway they have caught him and time will tell. In the mean time crawl back to your hole prawn. 

Oh by the way, the cop that was shot and kill in Tamworth the other day. Whats your views on that. Is the crim who lies in a Sydney hospital innocent of killing this man and leaving his 6 children behind. I think not. Maybe not guilty for shooting but certainly guilty for being a part of it. But hey we will pay 100 of thousands of dollars for the case????


----------



## Bill M (22 March 2013)

prawn_86 said:


> I have no idea about this at all, the first i heard was 2 weeks ago. But as an impartial observer can you please show me the evidence that *proves* he is a murderer? I'm not saying he is or isn't because i don't know.
> 
> So by your theory, if you refuse the police something then you are guilty. If the police rocked up to your place without a warrant asking to search it would you let them? Remember if you dont you're already guilty...




---
*Malcolm Naden pleads guilty to murders*

FORMER bush fugitive Malcolm Naden has pleaded guilty to the 2005 murders of Kristy Scholes and his cousin Lateesha Nolan.

Naden, 39, appeared in the NSW Supreme Court today, where he entered guilty pleas to 18 charges against him, including the indecent assault of a 12-year-old girl, the attempted murder of a police officer and a string of break-and-enter offences.

Link:http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/malcolm-naden-pleads-guilty-to-murders/story-e6frg6nf-1226603287323
---

Job well done by the Police and the Courts.


----------

