also raided the houses of other members of the Milat family. They found a huge amount of ammunition, an arsenal of weapons, and rope and cable ties that were identical to those found at the murder scenes. The Crown Prosecutor Mark Tedeschi explains that there was even more damming evidence:
There was some rope found in a pillowcase at Milat’s home. There was some blood on this rope, and this blood was analysed and DNA profiling linked it to Mr and Mrs Clarke. Police found parts of a gun hidden in a wall cavity in Milat’s home. Ballistic tests proved that it was one of two weapons used in two of the murders. Milat’s response was, ‘I know knowing about the weapon’, even though it was painted with camouflage paint, and there were a whole load of other weapons, that he acknowledged were his, painted in exactly the same camouflage paint.
One item that Milat didn’t hide was a framed photograph of his girlfriend wearing a distinctive Benetton top. It was the same top that had been owned by Caroline Clarke.
More than ten years after Milat’s arrest, Police Superintendent Clive Small, who headed the task force set up to deal with the backpacker murders, spoke about his thoughts on Milat. Superintendent Small observed that Milat’s serial killer signature revealed: ‘a pattern of behaviour that goes clearly beyond just the killing of a person, and continues well after.’
As with the Russian cannibal Andrei Chikatilo – responsible for at least fifty-two brutal slayings – Ivan Milat felt compelled to hurt and terrorise his victims as much as possible. Both men preferred the outdoors as locations to perpetrate their killings, favouring dense woodland – a private place where they could spend a lot of time undisturbed with their victims. Some killers return to the scene of an undiscovered body, to gloat, masturbate or even engage in sexual acts with a decaying corpse. There is every reason to expect that Milat had returned to his own personal graveyard.
Using gags to muffle his captives’ pain, Milat would delight in maiming them with his weapons. While Chikatilo relished hearing his child victims’ screams whenever possible, Milat actually enjoyed gagging his. It furthered the control element to his fantasies as well as having the practical advantage of quieting their agonised cries. Evident in Milat’s case, too, as with Bundy, Gacy and Dean Corll, amongst so many others, is a unique thrill, gleaned from committing double homicides. Having a terrified boyfriend watch helplessly as his girlfriend was assaulted and killed, and vice versa, gave Milat insurmountable pleasure.
It has been alleged by one of Milat’s brothers that Ivan may have been responsible for up to twenty-eight murders, and that he also confessed the crimes to his mother, who has since passed away. Ivan was proven to have had an opportunity to commit the crimes associated with them each and every time.
Ivan Milat was arrogant and macho – a classic bully–loser type with a gargantuan chip on his shoulder. He was someone who craved attention, even if it was only in the form of notoriety. In prison for the rest of his days, he was moved to a maximum-security jail after a failed escape attempt. Milat, the tough guy, is segregated from many of his fellow inmates for his own protection. He has bragged that if ever presented with the opportunity he will escape from prison. He has also never once publicly admitted culpability for any of the murders.
Nevertheless, it is our opinion, based on viewing hours of trial testimony and reviewing the evidence in this case, that Milat’s guilt in these homicides is beyond reasonable doubt. Though the science of psychological profiling is far from gospel, Milat’s profiles closely resembled those based on the Belanglo killer. This, coupled with the rest of the police and prosecution’s findings, makes for a strong case indeed. Milat’s insistence that he is innocent is common among serial killers, especially seasoned and psychopathic criminals such as he.
For the families of the victims, Milat’s utter lack of remorse is yet another callous blow. Talking about their daughter Caroline, Jacquie and Ian Clarke remember fondly their bright and bubbly girl who had always dreamed of visiting Australia. She was a wilful, adventurous spirit, always keen to explore. When her wish was eventually granted, only to be cut dreadfully short by a pathetic, anger-driven, sexually inadequate monster, the pain was almost too much for her parents to bear. ‘I couldn’t bring myself to believe that such an insignificant little man could have wrought such horror and misery on so many people,’ says Ian Clarke. All these years later, the agony of knowing exactly what happened to their daughter is still very much with the couple, though they remained admirably composed during our interview with them. Resolute and dignified, they will not allow their daughter’s killer the satisfaction of seeing their own destruction.
Ian recalls the occasion, as he sat in court at Milat’s murder trial, when the wilting defendant, now lacking his trademark moustache, slipped up under clever questioning about a pair of gloves worn during some of the murders. Milat, under pressure had yelled: ‘I never wore any…’, before stopping himself.
‘You could have heard a pin drop. It was a magical moment,’ recalls Ian Clarke. Though the physical and circumstantial evidence against Milat was already more than clear Ian Clarke knew then that Milat was indeed Caroline’s killer. Though emotional, he was jubilant, knowing in his heart that the police had the right man and that he would pay for what he had done to Caroline and the others.
Ultimately, even members of Milat’s own family turned against him. The words of his brother George are damming: ‘I think he was more than twisted… he was definitively gone. Some of my brothers said there must be something wrong with him. Something wrong with him? Of course there was something wrong with him. The jail he’s in? It’s a special prison within a prison. What’s he going to do there? I don’t really know… I don’t really care. It’s his fault for landing in there. He’s been in trouble all his life.’ Milat’s lawyer, Terry Martin, explains, however, that Ivan still maintains his innocence, no matter what: ‘My client’s instructions to me were that he did not do it. Therefore if he didn’t do it, then someone terribly close to him must have. [But] when he spoke at his trial, he didn’t do himself any favours at all.’ Milat’s protestations of innocence, however callous, still find an audience willing to listen to him, but Neil Mercer of The Sunday Telegraph sums up the Milat case best of all: ‘There are the occasional outbreaks of “Milat is innocent”, but I think that’s rubbish. If you look at all the evidence, read the trial transcript, look at the exhibits and where they were found, and Milat’s answers in court – there is no doubt that he killed those seven people.’
FBI HIGH RISK REGISTER – IVAN MILAT
| 1. | Alcohol abuse |
| 2. | Drug abuse |
| 3. | Psychiatric history |
| 4. | Criminal history |
| 5. | Sexual problems |
| 6. | Physical abuse |
| 7. | Psychological abuse |
| 8/9 | Dominant father figure aligned with a negative relationship with male caretaker figures |
| 10. | Negative relationships with both natural mother and or adoptive mother |
| 11. | Treated unfairly |
| 12. | Head trauma |
| 13. | Demon seed |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |