Sunday, July 1, 2012


The coroner’s verdict is in.  Azaria Chamberlain was, according to the coroner, killed by a dingo at Ayers Rock.  But I’m at a loss to understand how this decision was reached.

A body was never found.  For all we know, Azaria Chamberlain is still alive, somewhere.

But assuming she did die, I’m not convinced a dingo was the cause.  Her mother Lindy saw a dingo leave the tent.  She didn’t see a baby with that dingo, and only knew the baby was missing when she went into the tent.  The aboriginal tracker who claimed to see the dingo footprints also said there were indications of a baby’s body being dragged, but can’t seem to explain how she knew it was a baby.  And she didn’t see blood stains.

 see blood stains.
nto the tendd only knew the baby was missing when she went into the tendQuestions remain about the dingo that supposedly killed Azaria.  Why would a dingo go into the back of the tent, past two sleeping boys, to where the baby girl lay?  Why take her?  How did a dingo later get the matinee jacket off the body, without totally destroying it in the process?

Somebody knows what happened to Azaria Chamberlain.  Did Lindy, in a fit of post-natal depression, kill the baby?  As a good Christian woman, she was supposed to be happy in her role as a pastor’s wife, but who’s to say she was totally miserable and saw no other way out?  She got little or no support from the church she belonged to.  And what about the person/s who disposed of the matinee jacket at the dingo’s lair?  What do they know about the fate of that we girl, and why haven’t they come forward with the information?  Is it out of guilt?

Easy to blame a dingo for a crime that may or may not have happened.  But those responsible for a murder, if one occurred, need to be held responsible.go footprints also said there were indications of a baby'had a ?


sammiraye said...

I am going to reply to every aspect of your post and I hope that at the end of this you will have a little bit more insight into the death of Azaria Chamberlain.
First off, Lindy saw a dingo exit the tent, but it was a dimly light area. After checking on her children and realizing that Azaria was gone, she came out and saw the dingo standing by the family car and noticed it had nothing in its mouth. The aborignal trackers and experts in the field believe that there were two dingos, as they usually travel together. So the dingo she saw at the car was not the same dingo she saw exiting her tent. The aborignal tracker was actually able to explain how he knew it was a baby. After following the tracks, they discovered that the dingo had changed directions, Something they had missed the night before. They found depressions in the sand that where consistent with the Azarias size, suggesting that the dingo set her down. They also noticed that the pattern in the sand resembled the pattern on Azarias clothing. There was blood in the tent, on blankets, outside the tents, and on Reagan's parka. The most likely explaination as to why there were no blood stains found in the sand is because she stopped bleeding. Secondly, it would seem more probable that the dingo would take a 9-week old, 10-lb baby instead of a 4 year old because she was easier to carry. According to experts in the field, dingoes capture their prey and then run away with it and eat it elsewhere. Since the dingo could easily carry poor baby Azaria, she was the unfortunate victim. There have also been reported cases of dingoes in the Ayers Rock and Fraser Island area attacking humans, most commonly children. Recently, there was a case of a dingo attempting to drag away a 13-month old child in the Ayers Rock area. Dingoes unwrap their food before eating it and are able to do so with minimal damage. They use their front paws as clamps and their canine teeth to remove the clothing or wrapping.

sammiraye said...

Thirdly, Lindy was not suffering from any type of post-natal depression as you suggested. Witnesses at the campsite described Lindy as a "loving mother." Lindy and Michael Chamberlain were Seventh Day Adventists and they received tremendous support from their church. Their church provided and paid for their legal team throughout two inquires, the trial, the appeals and all other legal expenses related to this tragedy. Their was one person who came forward many years after the fact and stated that he and two friends stubbled upon the dingo that took Azaria Chamberlain on the night she went missing. He said that the dingo had Azaria and that they shot the dingo and took the tiny body of Azaria Chamberlain and gave her a burial in a residential area, presumably in one of the friends backyards. He also stated that they hadn't come forward before because they were afraid that they would get in trouble for shooting the dingo in a national forest. He was 79 when he came forward and had no knowledge as to where Azaria might be buried because he had left that up to the two men with him that night. One of these men was deceased at the time his friend came forward and the other was suffering from Alzheimers. The cops looked into it and checked the backyards they believed could have the remains of Azaria Chamberlain, but found nothing so the mans claims remain unsubstantiated. The high court of Austrailia have determined that no such murder occured. There is overwhelming evidence that a dingo, did in fact take Azaria Chamberlain. The sad truth to the question of the whereabouts of Azaria's body is that there was simply nothing left to find. When a dingo finds prey, they eat it all. If it is a bird they even eat the feathers, if it is a rabbit, they eat the fur. I think you can see where I am going with this. Sometimes people seem to forget that Azaria is the main tragedy in this case. A defenseless 9-week old baby was taken by a wild animal. If it was a bear would you question it? The point is it was a wild animal with no regard to human life. And now poor baby Azaria is lost to the wilderness. Let's all not forget that that is who this is about. Haven't the Chamberlains been through enough without constantly having people doubting their innocence without all the facts? What if that was your child? Wouldn't you want someone to research it thoroughly before they once again squandered your good name? Maybe next time you should give the Chamberlains the courtesy of researching the case first.