Cheryl GrimmerIn January 1970, 3-year-old Cheryl Grimmer went missing from Fairy Meadow Beach in Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. Although she has never been found, police have a prime suspect who they believe responsible. Just a teenager at the time of Cheryl’s disappearance, the man has managed to evade justice for what is a tragic and senseless crime.
The beach at Fairy Meadow, located just 3km north of Wollongong’s CBD in New South Wales, Australia, is a popular place for families to take their children, people to walk their dogs and tourists to enjoy the sights of the scenic coastline. But since 1970, the beach has been closely associated with the tragic disappearance of a young child.
On the morning of January 12, 1970, the Grimmer family went to the beach at Fairy Meadow in Illawarra. Carole Grimmer took her four children, Ricki, Stephen, and Paul, who were 7, 5, and 4-years-old respectively, and her daughter, 3-year-old Cheryl. Their father, Vince, was working away at the time as a sapper for the Australian Army.
The Grimmer family had recently emigrated to Australia from Bristol, England, in the spring of 1968, and were living in Fairy Meadow Migrant Hostel located near the beach. By early afternoon, Carole decided to take the children home as the weather had turned by about 1:30pm, and while she packed up their belongings, the children went to the shower block together.
After ten minutes has passed, Ricki went back to his mother to say that his youngest sibling Cheryl was refusing to come out of the shower block. Carole went immediately with Ricki back to the shower block, but found that Cheryl was no longer there. Thinking she might have wandered off, Carole began to panic.
With no phone nearby, she had to make her way to Elliotts Road and there ask the residents to call the police. The disappearance of the missing girl sparked a massive search, with officers searching the beach and sea areas, as well as questioning any potential witnesses who might have seen Cheryl.
Witnesses claimed to have seen a man holding Cheryl up to drink water from a fountain, before running off with her wrapped up in a towel. Another witness claimed that Cheryl was seen in a white car, but could recall nothing further about the vehicle. The day following her disappearance, police announced they a number of theories about what happened.
The four main possible explanations for Cheryl going missing were, that she had wandered into the ocean and was carried away by the currents, that she was hiding somewhere and had fallen asleep, that she had fallen into a waterway, and the lastly, that she had been kidnapped by person or persons unknown.
By end of the second day of searching, police were confident that the only plausible explanation was the last, that she had been taken against her will. They continued to follow leads, including a sighting of a blue Volkswagen Type 2 van near the scene of the crime. On the third day, there was a significant development.
On January 14, 1970, police received a note demanding $10,000 for the safe return of Cheryl Grimmer. The note stated the child was unharmed, and that the money was to be taken to a designated spot for handover. The staged drop for the money was in Bulli, and officers disguised as council workers stood ready to apprehend the kidnapper.
However, no-one showed to collect the ransom, with police believing that the kidnapper had been spooked after realising the large police operation had been set-up. Despite this, investigators initially remained confident that the ransom note was genuine, but when the kidnapper failed to contact police again, it was determined the note was a cruel hoax.
With this lead hitting a dead end, police had little in the way of possible suspects. Three men were considered as part of the investigation, however none could be positively identified as the man witnesses had seen with Cheryl. The case became infamous in Australia, and wishing to escape such notoriety, the Grimmer family moved back to England.
In April 1971, police were made aware of incriminating statements made by a teenager residing at the Metropolitan Children’s Shelter in Sydney, a home for troubled boys. Detectives came to interview the boy about his comments regarding the January 1970 disappearance of three-year-old Cheryl Grimmer, that implicated himself in the toddler’s possible kidnapping.
Detective Sergeant Parrington. Detective Constable Findlay arrived at the shelter on April 29, 1971 to conduct the interview, which began at 2.20pm. “We have been informed by Mr. Leckie that you may be in possession of information which could be of value to us in our investigations into the disappearance of Cheryl Gene Grimmer at Fairy Meadow Beach on the 2 January, 1970,” said Parrington.
Parrington: “I am going to ask certain questions which will be recorded together with your answers to those questions on the typewriter. At the conclusion of the interview you will be handed a copy of the record of interview to read and you may read it if you wish and if you agree it is a true and correct record of interview.”
(Disclaimer: The suspect is known in all official documents relating to the case as “Mercury,” and cannot be named for legal reasons, as a result, he will be referred to by this name only in this article.)
Mercury: “Yes”
Parrington: “What is your full name?”
Mercury: (Name redacted)
Parrington: “What is your date of birth?”
Mercury: “Second of the second, fifty four.”
Parrington: “Where do you reside?”
Mercury: “85 Birrel Street, Waverly.”
Parrington: “With whom do you reside at this address?”
Mercury: “I had been living with friends of mine there.”
Parrington: “Have you any parents?”
Mercury: “Yes”
Parrington: “Where do they reside?”
Mercury: “11 Baxter Street, Frankston, Victoria.”
Parrington: “Were you born in Australia?”
Mercury: “No”
Parrington: “Where were you born?”
Mercury: “Manchester, England.”
Parrington: “When did you arrive in Australia?”
Mercury: “March 68.”
Parrington: “Have you had any association with the City of Wollongong?”
Mercury: “Yes”
Parrington: “Would you tell us what association you have had with this centre”
Mercury: “I used to live at Fairy Meadow Hostel when we first came out from England, for about six weeks. After we left there we were living in Sydney and I used to go back to Wollongong for a day on occasions, then my father got the urge to move on and we went to Victoria and I shot through from there twice and on those times I went to Wollongong to.”
Parrington: “Mr. Leckie has informed us that you have some knowledge of events which may assist us in our inquiries relative to the disappearance of the child Cheryl Gene Grimmer from Fairy Meadow Beach. Would you like to tell us what this knowledge is?”
Mercury: “Yes, I was down the beach that day and I saw a man drive past me in a car with a little girl. I walked along the beach to Wollongong and I saw the man driving back on his own.”
Parrington: “Do you know who this man is?”
Mercury: “No”
Parrington: “Can you give us any description of the man or the girl?”
Mercury: “The man had a dark growth on his face and his hair was hanging over his right eye, but I cannot describe what the girl looked like.”
Parrington: “We have been informed by Mr. Leckie that you have appeared to be worried about something. Would you like to tell us if this is so?”
Mercury: “Yes, I am worried, I did that to the little girl, I didn’t mean to do it.”
Parrington: “Do you mean that you had something to do with the disappearance of the child, Cheryl Gene Grimmer?”
Mercury: “Yes”
Parrington: “I am now going to ask you certain questions about this matter I must warn you that you are not obliged to say anything unless you so desire as anything you do say may be later given in evidence. Do you understand that?”
Mercury: “Yes”
Parrington: “Would you like to tell us what you know about the disappearance of this girl?”
Mercury: “I arrived in Fairy Meadow beach early on the morning of the 12th January, 1970, I hung around the beach area until I seen these bunch of children come up from a swim. They all went into the changing room and I took that they changed themselves then they came out of the change room. I saw this little girl get a drink from a bubbler outside of the change room. Some of the children started to walk away and this little girl hung back. I came around from the back of the shower block and grabbed the little girl. I took her by the hand and put one hand around her mouth and carried her around to the sandhills. I then continued up to Bulli Pass where I took the little girl. She started to scream when I got her up there. She would not be quiet. So I put my arms around her throat and strangled her. I left her lying on the ground at the side of a tree. I covered her up with bushes and leaves and threw some dirt on top. I then shuffled up the leaves and grass around where I had been to make it look like no one had been there. I then made my way back to Fairy Meadow. I took the little girls swimming suit with me. I was going to take the swim trunks home with me and put them in a drawer but I decided not to because I thought my mother might find them, so I burnt them in an incinerator on a beach going towards Corrimal. I then went back home, that’s it.”
Parrington: “What time was it when you first saw the children come up from a swim.”
Mercury: “I don’t know I did not take much notice of the time I did not have a
watch I think it was about mid afternoon.”
Parrington: “How would you describe these children?”
Mercury: “There was a few boys and a few girls between about seven and twelve.”
Parrington: “Did you know any of these children?”
Mercury: “No”
Parrington: “At this this time did you know the girl Cheryl Gene Grimmer?”
Mercury: “No”
Parrington: “Was the girl you say you later carried away one of the children you saw come up from the beach?”
Mercury: “Yes, sir.”
Parrington: “Can you remember how she was dressed?”
Mercury: “In a swimsuit.”
Parrington: “Can you describe the swimsuit?”
Mercury: “One that came down the front with two straps over the shoulders.”
Parrington: “Was it made of all the same material?”
Mercury: “I do not remember.”
Parrington: “Would you describe the girl?”
Mercury: “She was about this high … Indicates height three or four feet.. fair complexion, fair to dark hair, she was carrying a towel white I think over her shoulder.”
Parrington: “Where were you when you observed these children walk up these children walk up from the beach?”
Mercury: “I was on the beach just to the left of the ladies changing pavilion.”
Parrington: “Were you on the ocean side of the fence separating the changing room area from the beach or on the changing room side?”
Mercury: “I was on the pavilion side.”
Parrington: “What were you doing there?”
Mercury: “Just sitting.”
Parrington: “Did you have any particular reason for sitting there?”
Mercury: “No”
Parrington: “Did you actually see all these children enter the changing pavilion?”
Mercury: “No, I could not see the door to the changing pavilion from where I was sitting, they walked towards the men’s changing pavilion and I gathered that they went in there.”
Parrington: “Was the small girl you have described with them when they passed from your view walking in the direction of the changing pavilion?”
Mercury: “Yes, sir.”
Parrington: “What was the next thing that you observed?”
Mercury: “I think one boy came out first, with someone else I thought it was a girl, they got a drink from the water thing in front of the pavilion, then they started to move towards the roadway.”
Parrington: “Which roadway do you mean?”
Mercury: “The roadway leading from the main road to the beach.”
Parrington: “Which way did they go?”
Mercury: “Down towards the main road, they walked between the pavilion and the boat shed, or in that direction as far as I could see.”
Parrington: “What happened next?”
Mercury: “All the children came out and as far as I could see they seemed to go towards the roadway.”
Parrington: “Did the little girl come out with the other children?”
Mercury: “Yes she had a drink at the water fountain, someone lifted her up I think.”
Parrington: “How was she dressed then?”
Mercury: “I can’t remember I know she had something around her waist.”
Parrington: “What did the small girl do after she had a drink from the bubbler?”
Mercury: “She started to follow the other children towards the roadway. She got in between the pavilion and the boatshed. I come around the front of the pavilion behind her and grabbed her. There was some bloke sitting on the wall in front of the pavilion so I had to put my hand over her mouth to stop her screaming. Because if she had of screamed he would have heard it. All the other children were walking away towards the Hostel and I took off over the back carrying the little girl and made my way to Bulli Pass without being seen.”
Parrington: “Where did you carry the child after leaving the pavilion area?”
Mercury: “Over towards the main roadway.”
Parrington: “Did you proceed straight to the Bulli area?”
Mercury: “No I went over the big drain and stayed in the scrub area and got near a creek near the main road. I tied a handkerchief and a shoelace around her mouth to stop her screaming and with the other shoelace I tied up her hands.”
Parrington: “Did you tie her hands in front of her or behind her back?”
Mercury: “Behind her back.”
Parrington: “What type of shoelaces did you use?”
Mercury: “Black shoelaces.”
Parrington: “Can you describe the handkerchief you used as a gag?”
Mercury: “No.”
Parrington: “How long did you remain in the area of this creek?”
Mercury: “About thirty five minutes, I then made my way to Bulli Pass.”
Parrington: “Did you notice any undue activity in the area of the Fairy Meadow Surf Pavillion whilst you were in the bush.”
Mercury: “No I did not look back.”
Parrington: “How did you take the girl from the bush area to Bulli Pass?”
Mercury: “I took her around the back streets.”
Parrington: “Did you carry her?”
Mercury: “Yes.”
Parrington: “Was it daylight then?”
Mercury: “It was coming on to dark.”
Parrington: “Was the little girl alive then?”
Mercury: “Yes.”
Parrington: “How do you know she was alive?”
Mercury: “Because she was moving.”
Parrington: “Was she still gagged and bound?”
Mercury: “Yes.”
Parrington: “Upon arrival at the Bulli Pass area what was your intention?”
Mercury: “I was going to have sexual intercourse with her.”
Parrington: “Did you have sexual intercourse with her?”
Mercury: “No.”
Parrington: “Would you like to tell us why you changed you mind?”
Mercury: “Because she started to scream as soon as I took the gag off her”
Parrington: “Why did you take the gag off her?”
Mercury: “I don’t know why, I just thought I would take it off and I took it off”
Parrington: “Did you untie her hands?”
Mercury: “No.”
Parrington: “What did you do when she started to scream?”
Mercury: “I put my hands around her throat and told her to shut up.”
Parrington: “What happened then?”
Mercury: “I guess I must have strangled her, she stopped breathing and stopped crying and I thought she was dead, so I panicked and covered her up with bushes and run for it.”
Parrington: “Was she wearing any clothing when you left her in the bush?”
Mercury: “No.”
Parrington: “How did you strangle her?”
Mercury: “With my hands.”
Parrington: “Were her hands still tied behind her back when you left her in the bush?”
Mercury: “Yes.”
Parrington: “Did you leave any of her clothing or other property in the bush with her?”
Mercury: “No, I took everything away.”
Parrington: “What did you take away?”
Mercury: “A towel, a swimsuit and another thing I don’t know what it was.”
Parrington: “Why did you take this property away?”
Mercury: “I didn’t want to leave it lying on the ground in case someone noticed it.”
Parrington: “You have already told us that you burnt the swimsuit in an incinerator at Corrimal, but that you intended to take them home and put them in a drawer. Why did you intend to take them home?”
Mercury: “No particular reason.”
Parrington: “Were you going to take them home for any sexual purpose?”
Mercury: “No.”
Parrington: “What did you do with the towel?”
Mercury: “I threw it in a drain near a Service Station on the highway at Fairy Meadow.”
Parrington: “Did you leave any of your own property where you left the body of this little girl?”
Mercury: “Only my shoelaces.”
Parrington: “You have said that you covered the body with leaves or branches. Did you also dig a hole or bury it in any way?”
Mercury: “No.”
Parrington: “Did you lie it on the ground in any particular fashion?”
Mercury: “No.”
Parrington: “Can you describe how the body was lying before you covered it with leaves?”
Mercury: “The body was on its back with the hands tied behind her.”
Parrington: “Did you injure the girl in any way before or after you say you thought she was dead?”
Mercury: “No”
Parrington: “You have said that when you walked around the front of the change pavilion at Fairy Meadow Beach you observed a man sitting on the wall in front of the change pavilion. Can you describe that man?”
Mercury: “No I walked between the wall and the pavilion and I cannot describe him I only saw the back of him.”
Parrington: “Are you prepared to indicate to the Police the place where you say you left the body of this little girl?”
Mercury: “I don’t know where it is.”
Parrington: “Are you in a position to indicate the general area where you say you carried the girl?”
Mercury: “Yes.”
Parrington: “Are you prepared to indicate to Police this area?”
Mercury: “Yes.”
Parrington: “Where were you employed on the 12 January ,1970?”
Mercury: “I wasn’t.”
Parrington: “Where were you living at that time?”
Mercury: “At the C.B. Chambers under an assumed name.”
Parrington: “What was the name you were using at the C.B. Chambers?”
Mercury: “Parkinson”
Parrington: “Is there anything further you wish to say before we complete this interview?”
Mercury: “No”
After Detective Parrington asked “Mercury” a total of 82 questions, the boy signed a record of interview containing a detailed confession, transcribed by DC Findlay, to the abduction and murder of Cheryl Grimmer. At the time, strict modern protections for minors did not exist, and so the interview was legally recorded without a parent, guardian, or independent support person present.
On May 3, 1971, “Mercury” accompanied detectives to Fairy Meadow Beach, and there walked investigators through the scene, pointing out where he sat, where he targeted Cheryl, and the location from which he claimed to have grabbed her. He then took police to the corner of Brokers and Balgownie roads, where he claimed the body was buried.
However, he noted that the area had undergone residential development and so couldn’t be sure it was the exact location. “Mercury” described for police how there had been a tubular steel gate, a cattle guard, a track, and a small creek near the scene of the murder. When police interviewed the owner of the property, he contradicted the description given by “Mercury”.
He stated that there had been no cattle guard in place at the time of the murder and that there had never been a tubular gate of any kind. These inconsistencies cast doubt on the confession, leading police to conclude that what “Mercury” had told them was false. As a result, he was ruled out as a suspect in the case.
A police report at the time, written by Detective Constable Phillip Findlay, stated: “On the whole it is considered without some material evidence to directly connect him with the missing child it would not be desirable to take any action against him in respect to this matter at this time.”
The police made numerous appeals to the public for information, and a $5000 reward was offered by the New South Wales government, but there was no breakthrough in the investigation and the case went cold. It would remain that way for the next 45 years, until a review of the evidence saw the case thrust back into the spotlight.
Those familiar with the case had long held out hope that Cheryl Grimmer was still alive after her kidnapping. Similarly, it was suspected that her kidnapper was a member of the community, and that someone, somewhere, might know something. Mike Gallacher, ew South Wales Police Minister, expressed his hope that Cheryl might someday come forward.
A physical trait the young Cheryl had was a belly button which protruded one centimetre, due to a medical condition. It was believed this characteristic could be used to identify the missing child, although authorities could not rule out that it may or may not have been corrected by surgery.
In 2008, a woman came forward, believing that she might be Cheryl Grimmer. A swab was taken from her inside cheek which proved not to match Cheryl’s DNA. Carole Grimmer believed very much that her daughter was still alive, despite a 2011 formal ruling by a coroner that she had died shortly after going missing, due to an undetermined cause.
The recommendation was that police should reopen the investigation. In response to this, police announced a $100,000 reward for information regarding Cheryl’s disappearance, and Wollongong detectives combined with the Homicide Squad’s ‘Unsolved Homicide Team’ into a new task force called “Strike Force Wessell”.
Several years after the investigation was reopened, Cheryl mother, Carole Grimmer, died in December 2014. Her father, Vince, had passed away in 2004. Both died without knowing what happened to their daughter. Two years after Carole’s death, police conducted a review of all the information on the case.
They went over witness statements, which were computerised for the first time, allowing easier access to information. This led to many new leads being brought to the attention of investigators, leads that appear to have not been properly pursued thoroughly enough during the original investigation.
In particular, police re-examined the 1971 confession made by “Mercury,” the teenager who implicated himself in the disappearance and alleged murder of Cheryl. Detectives visited the property where the teenager said he had committed the murder, and there questioned the owner’s son, who gave an account that contradicted that given by his father in 1971.
He told police that the cattle guard had “certainly” been in place at the time of the crime, and that he recalled a tubular gate, as well as a track leading over a creek into the property. Later that same year, investigators announced that three witnesses had come forward with information pertinent to the case.
A male teenager had been seen by these witnesses, who was described as loitering around the shower block. It was also revealed that police had a credible lead on a man who was seen by witnesses carrying a fair-haired child at the time of the disappearance. This individual, who police said would be in his 60’s, was urged to come forward.
The following year in January, police focused the investigation on the Mount Penang Training School for Boys, a reformatory school which detectives believed the suspect had attended in the early 1970s. This particular lead had been provided by an anonymous source, and it was suggested former staff or residents of the school could help with the inquiry.
On March 23, 2017, Australian authorities made the announcement that a man had been arrested in the Melbourne suburb of Frankston at 1:00pm the previous day in connection with the murder of Cheryl Grimmer. The suspect was extradited from Victoria, and charged at Wollongong Police Station with Cheryl’s abduction and murder.
The un-named man was held at the Silverwater Correctional Complex, while the investigation continued and prosecutors put together a case. According to police, it was unlikely that Cheryl Grimmer’s body would ever be found, given that 47 years had passed since her abduction, and the once rural area had experienced substantial development since that time.
As part of the prosecution’s case against the suspect, New South Wales police announced in April 2017 that they were attempting to contact a family who gave a witness statement on the day of the abduction. Shortly after the crime, the family moved to Papua New Guinea and then back to their native Nottinghamshire in England.
With the assistance of Interpol, the family were eventually traced, and their testimony was believed to form a significant part of the eventual court case. The next month, in May 2017, it was revealed that the man arrested in March 2017, was the same individual who had confessed to Cheryl’s abduction and murder as a teenager in 1971.
The suspect was a 63-years-old, who was born in Britain and has been in Australia since the late 1960s. His name was withheld from the press because he was around 15-years-old at the time of the alleged offence, and therefore a minor. With the press not permitted to reveal his name, the prime suspect in the disappearance of Cheryl Grimmer was known simply as “Mercury.”
In his 1971 confession, Mercury provided details that, police believed, he could only have known by present at the beach when the abduction occurred. This included a description of the royal blue bathing suit Cheryl was wearing that day, and of the white towel she was carrying. Mercury also mentioned seeing someone pick up Cheryl so that she could drink from a water fountain, something her brother Ricki had confirmed he did.
Mercury appeared via video link at the Supreme Court of New South Wales on September 7, 2018, and spoke only to confirm his name and enter a not guilty plea. His trial was due to occur in the same court in May 2019, however the defence argued that the accused was significantly mentally unwell at the time of the confession.
They stated their belief that it was inadmissible in court, and argued the accused had also confessed to the murder of a prison guard, which had been determined to be false. Before the trial started, a judge declared a key piece of evidence inadmissible, being that the confession was not obtained in the presence of a parent or guardian, leading to the prosecution dropping the charge against the suspect in February 2019.
On October 15, 2025, the Parliament of New South Wales established an inquiry into unsolved murders and long-term missing persons cases. It was announced the inquiry would be examine cases from 1965-2010 within New South Wales. One of those cases that appeared alongside others was the disappearance of Cheryl Grimmer.
Later that same month, on October 23rd, at a session of the New South Wales Legislative Council, the previously-charged suspect – known by the pseudonym “Mercury” – was publicly named by MP Jeremy Buckingham under parliamentary privilege. Buckingham had also read out the 1971 confession, and called for a new investigation into the case.
This had followed an ultimatum given the previous week from the Grimmer family. The suspect “Mercury” was asked to either admit guilt for Cheryl’s murder, or explain how he knew details of the crime that had not been made public at the time of his 1971 confession. As a result, the Cheryl Grimmer case was thrust back into the spotlight.
In February 2026, it was announced by Sally Dowling, the serving Director of Public Prosecutions, that her office would conduct a special review into the Grimmer case, despite it being past the normal time limit that families are allotted to request a review. In June 2026, a New South Wales parliamentary inquiry was launched.
This would examine long-term missing persons and unsolved cold-case murders, with officially opened public hearings, with Cheryl’s case acting as a primary focus. On the first day of hearings, Cheryl’s elder brother, Ricki Nash, delivered an emotional testimony and demanded accountability.
Nash fiercely criticised more than 50 years of police failures, stating, “If the police had done their job in 1971, we would have known the truth years ago”. Shortly after the June 2026 hearings, Cheryl’s other brother, Paul Grimmer, reiterated the family’s exhaustion over the legal technicality keeping “Mercury” free, stating that the family simply wants justice for their sister.
John Brennan Crutchley Dubbed the Vampire Rapist, John Brennan Crutchley was a suspected serial killer who drank the blood of one of his kidnapping victims.
Red Inn Murders The Red Inn Murders were occurred in France during the 19th century, where the proprietors of an inn killed and cannibalised their clientele.
George “G” Williams During the 1990’s and early 2000’s, George “G” Williams carried out a murderous vendetta against Suge Knight and his Death Row Records.
Nancy Guthrie Kidnapping The Nancy Guthrie Kidnapping occurred on February 1, 2026, when the 84-year-old mother of US News anchor Savannah Guthrie vanished.
Atlas Vampire Case The unsolved murder of a Swedish prostitute has become known as the Atlas Vampire case, because the killer drank the victims blood.
Ian Watkins As the lead singer of Welsh rock band the Lostprophets, Ian Watkins had legions of fans, but few could know he was a prolific child abuser.
Copyright © 2025 The True Crime Database. All Rights Reserved.
