In this post I share an engagement with a reader of a book, I Fed the Baby, published on the 50th anniversary of the Crewe Murders that occurred in Pukekawa, NZ. The Crewe murders have since been billed as one of NZ’s top “Cold Cases” and an unsolved mystery. This book answers the primary unanswered questions, who was the woman who fed the baby, what .22 was used and why were the Crewes killed. Reliving this mystery 53 years on readers engage with me as I answer their questions. Enjoy!
Len Demler & The Murders
In 1970 a Pukekawa farmer by the name of Len Demler arranged for the murder of his daughter and son-in-law (Jeanette and Harvey Crewe). Len had autism and these murders followed Jeanette’s refusal the day before to sign a dodgy Will Probate that Len asked her to sign. These murders were made quite public at the time and Len’s conniving thereafter made him the cop’s prime suspect at the time. His motive for murdering his daughter (it was primarily monetary) went back decades and was distracted from in the subsequent public hoo-haa as Arthur Alan Thomas became the prime suspect, was charged, convicted, pardoned etc.
John Ingley knew a lot. Unbeknown to him at the time, he developed a personal relationship with the woman who had ‘fed the baby’. OMG! Imagine what that would have felt like knowing that she was ‘her’ and that her front missing teeth would have been taken out by a woman in a death struggle! He knew who pulled the trigger three times to kill them both but wouldn’t say it aloud. He was actually a smart man who learned the power that crooks can wield. He knew how it was done and found out why they were taken out. He shared a lot with his editor, but not all.
I bought the company that had agreed to publish John’s work. Before publication therefore I had to establish reality for myself, connecting John’s research with my own research and essentially, I [re-]wrote the book. With my extensive knowledge of human nature, particularly in the area of autism and Aspergers, it all made sense to me and sufficiently that those in the know really sat up and took notice.
The First Engagement
Here is an engagement that I had recently with one reader of IFTB. It explains much.
Quite a remarkable book which unfortunately still leaves the whole dunnit unanswered? You would think it should be possible to trace the subsequent owners of the Crewe farm and who actually sold it which I suspect would have been Len as trustee. But it might shed a few clues. Maybe not. Obviously someone benefited from the murders and it has to be financially. Clearly Len & Heather did but that seems to me to be too obvious. Maybe the lawyers know more than what they may have actually had to declare but not willing to say more due to fear of retaliation or they also benefited. A 53 year mystery and by now many of those who benefited may well have passed on.
Then I responded with this:
Thank you [name withheld]. My book The Crewe Murders UNMASKED!! explains it all. My book is available free online. John’s research is solid but the murders are a mystery no more.
Who dunnit – John says the son’s of a family friend, but he well knew the price of speaking out so never did. I think it was Heather’s husband a close friend of Len and who Maisey hated! Wonder what she knew? He pulled the trigger three times – twice for Harvey and once for Jeanette. Remember that he was discharged from the US Military with a dishonourable discharge and that he was never cross-examined – ever. Ditto Heather. Funny? Not if he did it and AAT was framed. The only source of validation of him out of the country came from those with an agenda and who had the power to cover up. Americans were also pinged by more than once source at the time. Everything looks like Len awaited the call on the Sunday that he had gotten back to the USA before he let it all be known on the Monday and the back-dating didn’t work to those in the know but the crooked cops did indeed know. Did you know that Len drank at the same bar as the crooked cop? Did you know that Andy’s first act was to take all the photos from the Mangere Historical Society in his later cover-up? There’s heaps more I could say.
Money – yes. Len engineered it all.
Lawyers – yes. Four more disciplines as well- politicians, media, judiciary and on and on . . .
Passed on – Yes, but Pamela’s accomplice is still alive as is the driver who has psychiatric issues himself and has refused to talk. “Best left alone” he says. I know!
The Second Engagement
Our deeper engagement:
Morning [name withheld]
Thanks for engaging
> The son’ of a family friend.
No. Len organised it. John never told us what he thought for more than one ‘good’ reason. I believe that Bob pulled the trigger even though we put it in John’s book that it was the nastier of the sons who did it – still a possibility.
> Clearly the killings and removal of the bodies were very well organised
I would say organised yes in terms of planned but not “very well”.
> with what one could say was with “military“ precision
Yes. Len was intimately involved [my logical assumption here] and orchestrated it, but the implementation was indeed Bob’s care.
> and even including the occasional feeding of Rochelle, the siting of Rochelle in the front paddock and the unidentified woman.
No. I think the planning included the killing and probably disposal in the truck the next morning but the rest not. It strikes me that they executed their plan to kill as per Len’s OK but that the rest was a little impromptu/dis coordinated, more along the lines of “Umm, what do we do now?” sort of thing.
Pam and her colleague looked after Rochelle at Len’s place. Rochelle was NOT left in her cot that length of time! Just look at the photos and use your reason! The length of time she spent in her cot was a maximum 12 hours, possibly eight, probably one or none. She was extracted from the murder scene, probably that night or perhaps the Thursday morning then placed back on the Monday morning or perhaps the Sunday night for appearances.
Rochelle was not the target and was a problem to Len so when others chose to do things he would have let them do it. Remember that she was too young and not the target. Women were the ones doing the child care thing back then, not men. They all cared for her at Len’s place and elsewhere and Len permitted this because she was never a problem/target – autism or not.
> It certainly rules out anyone who had no knowledge of the family or the location and in the process did,
> I think make some deliberate mistakes to confuse any investigation. Eg the apparent attempt to do some cleanup,
No. Pam told John that she and her ‘sis’ stopped cleaning up and to “clear out” due to instructions (probably from Len/Bob. He never asked [her, his informant,] from who.) i.e. a change of plan. They did this that Wednesday night probably within an hour of, if not minutes after the killings. [I note that this is an important fact not previously made known publicly. It is the reason why things were left unfinished because that’s exactly what happened. They started cleaning up them left it unfinished in order to clear out as instructed].
> the milk bottles left on the kitchen bench, the soiled nappies and maybe the deliberate leaving of the milk deliveries and newspaper in the mail box.
No, not deliberate. Stopped. The letterbox was their [only – sic] mistake because they forgot about it – they never thought about about it. John said that the letterbox could not be seen from Len’s place and the path to/from his place, thus it was out of sight and out of mind. Their intent was to present the killings as being done/found AFTER Bob had returned to the USA, thus giving him an alibi. It worked.
> I think a definite well planned event which could well point in the direction of Rob Souter.
Yes. Things blew up on the Tuesday the day before due to Jeanette refusing to sign the dodgy Will Probate with Len [probably – sic] calling Bob that night saying, “do it now”. The planning specifically would have then been approx 24 hours or perhaps 12 hours but the general, ‘We’ll get them’ having been around or discussed for years privately.
> But he needed somewhere to stay, provide assistance to get rid of the bodies and had to get that from someone familiar with the area. Most likely Len.
Yes and no. Len did organise it, yes, and Bob stayed with Heather of course who would have been with her Dad a lot during that time. [My supposition entirely here] The driver of the truck (still alive) took the bodies from their woolshed to their runoff farm up by the river the next morning Thursday. I don’t know when but I do know that he dumped them in the river later which is when the Thomas boy (not AAT) most likely got involved. I note that
L[D]es knows which of his bros this was, as do I and many others. [I note here again that just because AAT was found correctly to be innocent of the murders did not exonerate all the Thomas team – nine of them in the same generation. Neither BTW does it make them guilty of the original crime. Covering up for years afterwards, sure. Involved in the original crime – no.]
> But one could go on but what would it achieve.
You are helping to relive it all for us. Your thinking is and your questions are valuable. Do not stop now, please.
> Over 53 years the police have failed to do anything remotely realistic which begs the question why. Incompetence or corruption or perhaps both!
Your assumption that the Police do not know is naive and is incorrect. Some do and did. It was and is a matter of power and politics. There has never been a “mystery”. [The point here is that many gain from the facts that there was nobody found guilty! Cynicism – sure but not unfounded. In my experience logic and truth become second to many other things, money, friendship, power – you name it.]
> Clearly someone, somewhere knows something, if still alive, but is fearful of saying anything.
Yes, but not me. I ask questions and I know. I also speak of what I know.
> Would be interesting to know what Rochelle’s daughter thinks about it.
Not to me. Rochelle knows how her parents died, under whose instruction as well as why.
Deception Is The Real Crime
The crime to me is not murder, it is deception.
Bob did what he did and benefited financially. Big deal.
Len had autism and killed off his ‘recalcitrant’ daughter. Again big deal. Loopies always do that.
The driver has physchiatric issues and did what he did for Len. He knowingly broke the law. So?
Pam was a selfish little tart but many women (and men BTW) are exactly that!
Some of the cops were crooked. Ummm? Really?
People who know STFU. Self interest anyone? Do you really blame them?
To me the real crime is that people like you, me and others have been lied to for years. That’s called deception.
[name withheld], you wanted to find the truth . . . the world is not a black and white place. I have told you the name of the murderer and have explained things to you that happened 50+ years ago. BS artists will tell you otherwise. Most of the readers of IFTB are not really interested in what I say. They buy the book, read it (or parts of it) and it tickles their ears but nothing changes.
Thank you for listening nonetheless.
[End of engagement.]
I repeat that I believe that the Crewe murders were never a mystery and many have known the raw facts over many years. Some powerful people within the Police knew exactly what happened and why they were killed. It’s why one of Andy’s first acts was to send his troops in to the Mangere Historical Society to collect up all evidence of Len and Hutton drinking together at the pub. Cover up anyone?
Human nature explains it all but we must understand the mind of one with autism in order to understand these events.
Chin up people . . .