Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat 100km NW of Melbourne, 4 Feb 2024 #7

[Dr Samoht]

I think the police gave them warning, as once their son is named

All hell will break loose with the media and the police would be conducting searches

I would be surprised though if his parents didn't already know about any alleged problems

I would imagine his parents home would have been subjected to a search warrant in concert with the accused’s arrest at 6am on the Wednesday and the other local warrants executed in the Scotsburn area … so they had plenty of warning before the court appearance some 30 hours later.

 

[Whatson]

My guess is that whatever the alleged crime, if you want any chance of getting out lightly, you'd pay whatever you or family could. You wouldn't want a lawyer telling the court 'its the vibe of the thing'

Dennis Denuto enters the room...

 

[Deleted member 293720]

I have a feeling that Mick may know how the police have determined that Sam is deceased. Because I think a husband may insist on knowing how they know his wife is deceased, under the veil of complete confidentiality. It would be very hard to accept otherwise.

Maybe not specific details, but maybe something like "we have a trusted informant" or "we have CCTV of the incident" or "we have found physical evidence that Sam couldn't have survived" or something else that a grieving husband can accept.

imo

I mention before, that I am pretty confident the family knows what happened to Samantha

so they can privately mourn and to be prepared when the court case gets going

when details of Samantha's fate come to light

I don't think it's going to be good

But it was important the VICPOL caught the alleged murder, as he could easily strike again

 

[HoneyBunOne]

There is a good article here about the importance of a good barrister …

Advantages of Using a Top-Rated Criminal Barrister - Neighborhood Law

This article will explore the significant advantages and benefits of hiring a top-rated criminal barrister when facing criminal charges. It will emphasize how experienced and skilled legal representation can make a crucial difference in the outcome of a criminal case.

www.neighborhoodlaw.org

However it can be very expensive ….

The most sought-after Queens’ Counsel or Senior Counsel can charge upwards of $7,000 per day and, as serious court cases usually span weeks or even months, you can expect to be hit with a hefty legal bill for criminal barrister’s fees.

Should I Get a Barrister for My Court Case?

Deciding whether or not to hire a barrister is one of the most important decisions to make. Here are some of the things to consider when making this decision.

www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au

I was of the belief that he had a legal aid lawyer, from Werribee? Or was that in relation to another court matter?

 

[JLZ]

My guess is that whatever the alleged crime, if you want any chance of getting out lightly, you'd pay whatever you or family could. You wouldn't want a lawyer telling the court 'its the vibe of the thing'

I think any actual barrister with experience relevant to your predicament is likely to be pretty good. The higher your budget though, the wider the field of barristers from whom can be chosen the most suitable. As a client you don't have to choose; your solicitor, knowing your legal problem and what you're willing to pay, will sort it out with the barristers' clerk. (And in the end it's the solicitor who pays the barrister and you reimburse the former--preferably in advance.)

 

[JLZ]

I was of the belief that he had a legal aid lawyer, from Werribee? Or was that in relation to another court matter?

We don't know if it's the same PS.

 

[Dr Samoht]

P

There appears to be some houses on the corner of McCarthys and Boundary Roads, down near where Recreation Road meets Boak Road. IMO

Could there be any camera activity that captured people using Boak Road from one of these residences?? JMO.

Possibly, possibly not ( cctv is far from universal on rural fringe properties )
I do know that area was searched extensively by the SES and police in the first week of Sams disappearance , farm homes would have been doorknocked , outbuildings inspected , paddocks scoured , dams looked at .
In those early days the intelligence was the cctv image of Sam running east past the Eureka st boarding kennels towards Yankee Flat Rd and the belief she would enter the forest via McCarthys Rd .
This thinking was cancelled some days later when another female runner came forward saying the cctv footage was of her .

 

[ProfCluezo]

Dennis Denuto enters the room...

Definitely a good advertisement for the benefits of a skilled criminal barrister (in this case)! Thanks Whatson for bringing some humour into the thread, all in the name of understanding criminal and courtroom procedure... The insights and information provided by websleuthers this weekend has been incredible. Thanks to everyone!! It will be fascinating (albeit tragic) to see what unfolds in the courtroom when the hearing eventually takes place…. No doubt the courtroom will be packed…. Are there rules regarding who gets first go at seats? Any websleuthers planning/hoping to attend?

 

[Sher Lock]

I mention before, that I am pretty confident the family knows what happened to Samantha

so they can privately mourn and to be prepared when the court case gets going

when details of Samantha's fate come to light

I don't think it's going to be good

But it was important the VICPOL caught the alleged murder, as he could easily strike again

I'm not so sure Nifty.
Reason being is I think LE would be keeping pretty much everything under wraps so as not to prejudice the case in any way.
Also remember, this hasn't been tested in court yet.

 

[Toowong(s)]

Police are not able to sit around the table and decide for themselves who they will charge with murder,... it really does require a lot of hard, actionable, verifiable , reliable, evidence.. It requires any theoretical chain capable of being repeated in court , backed by evidence.

And then all this stuff goes off to the Office of the Public Prosecutor, where the Dept. of Public Prosecution hangs out, these are the people who take the Police case to court. So the police investigation team have to convince the OPP and the DPP that what they have is absolutely gold, and platinum, with diamonds thrown in. It has to be the kind of evidence that judge sees clearly for adjudication. By it's nature, it has to be more than someone just saying it happened, a lot more than that. That, on it's own, would not be enough.

Then, and only then, does a judge sign off on the warrant for arrest on the charge of murder.,

It has to be the kind of evidence that a jury sees, and hears and goes , 'yes. .. that was what was done, and he did it. ' .... no one in court has to worry about why he did it, that's for another day, another venue.

Once the OPP and the DPP are satisfied that the police have enough evidence to arrest someone, a warrant is issued, and off they go, banging on doors at 6am, because disturbance is the key , here. They want their arrestee disturbed.

VICPOL are not only convinced that Mrs Murphy is dead, but that she died early that Sunday morning, at Mt Clear, at the hand of Mr. S. These four things, not just him being charged with murder, but the claim of her death, and the location, and the timing points to VICPOL having some colossal , gigantic gold/platinum/diamond/ evidence, of the sort rarely falling into police hands....

Trooper, do we know 100% the initial arrest was for a murder charge? The accused was in custody being questioned for 30 hours, before being charged with murder. The “questioning” would have been pretty short if the accused was not talking at all. So the 30 hours may have been more due to other activities going on, not questioning. Taken into custody at 6am + 30hrs takes it to midday the next day. Vehicle was seized and two properties were searched, presumably phones, laptops, cameras, seized, at the time of the arrest.

So for a day and a half police had access to analyse everything they found and seized at the time of the arrest.

IMO it’s possible he may have been arrested under suspicion of being involved as he was in the area at the time (say a phone ping?). At this point police may not have been sure what the charge was, vehicle accident gone wrong, manslaughter, murder? Or even pure coincidence.

Then, once in custody, over the course of the day police have found the proverbial smoking gun evidence (trophy video recording or photo?). Then off to the DPP the next morning to complete the paperwork for the murder charge.

I recall MM saying he was first aware someone was in custody (but not aware of the charges) then MM was told the next day the person was to be charged with alleged murder.

In short IMO it’s possible the “smoking gun” evidence police found could have been unearthed after he was taken into custody, and not before.

Edit to add link re 30 hours:

Samantha Murphy update: Police to allege Samantha Murphy was murdered in 'deliberate act'

 

[Deleted member 293720]

I'm not so sure Nifty.
Reason being is I think LE would be keeping pretty much everything under wraps so as not to prejudice the case in any way.
Also remember, this hasn't been tested in court yet.

I am sure the family would want to know what happened to Samantha

Especially If the police knew that no one else was involved

I do think they would have been told what they believed has happened

Without going into specifics of police intelligence, investigation

 

[Trooper]

Trooper, do we know 100% the initial arrest was for a murder charge? The accused was in custody being questioned for 30 hours, before being charged with murder. The “questioning” would have been pretty short if the accused was not talking at all. So the 30 hours may have been more due to other activities going on, not questioning. Taken into custody at 6am + 30hrs takes it to midday the next day. Vehicle was seized and two properties were searched, presumably phones, laptops, cameras, seized, at the time of the arrest.

So for a day and a half police had access to analyse everything they found and seized at the time of the arrest.

IMO it’s possible he may have been arrested under suspicion of being involved as he was in the area at the time (say a phone ping?). At this point police may not have been sure what the charge was, vehicle accident gone wrong, manslaughter, murder? Or even pure coincidence.

Then, once in custody, over the course of the day police have found the proverbial smoking gun evidence (trophy video recording or photo?). Then off to the DPP the next morning to complete the paperwork for the murder charge.

I recall MM saying he was first aware someone was in custody (but not aware of the charges) then MM was told the next day the person was to be charged with alleged murder.

In short IMO it’s possible the “smoking gun” evidence police found could have been unearthed after he was taken into custody, and not before.

Edit to add link re 30 hours:

Samantha Murphy update: Police to allege Samantha Murphy was murdered in 'deliberate act'

Trooper, do we know 100% the initial arrest was for a murder charge? The accused was in custody being questioned for 30 hours, before being charged with murder. The “questioning” would have been pretty short if the accused was not talking at all. So the 30 hours may have been more due to other activities going on, not questioning. Taken into custody at 6am + 30hrs takes it to midday the next day. Vehicle was seized and two properties were searched, presumably phones, laptops, cameras, seized, at the time of the arrest.

So for a day and a half police had access to analyse everything they found and seized at the time of the arrest.

IMO it’s possible he may have been arrested under suspicion of being involved as he was in the area at the time (say a phone ping?). At this point police may not have been sure what the charge was, vehicle accident gone wrong, manslaughter, murder? Or even pure coincidence.

Then, once in custody, over the course of the day police have found the proverbial smoking gun evidence (trophy video recording or photo?). Then off to the DPP the next morning to complete the paperwork for the murder charge.

I recall MM saying he was first aware someone was in custody (but not aware of the charges) then MM was told the next day the person was to be charged with alleged murder.

In short IMO it’s possible the “smoking gun” evidence police found could have been unearthed after he was taken into custody, and not before.

Edit to add link re 30 hours:

Samantha Murphy update: Police to allege Samantha Murphy was murdered in 'deliberate act'

In Victoria, the police can hold you, and question you, for what is deemed ' a reasonable time'... naturally, this is seen quite differently if you're police, than if you are the unfortunate arrestee, but the police can stretch it out, if circumstances require it.. doesn't mean you have to answer anything at all. though. That right is retained.


When you are arrested, the police tell you what charge they are holding a warrant to arrest you on. I am presuming they told him they are arresting him on a charge of murder, because (a ) the police have not said anything contrary to that, and (b), there has been no mention of any other charge, or charges pending relating to Mrs' Murphy's murder, and ( c), if there were , they would all be bundled to together in the original warrant.

(As an aside, those putative charges recently held in the Magistrates court, were not warrant offences... that is, no warrant was issued in regard to those charges, whatever they were, which the court record did not elaborate. ) ..

Murder is a warrant required offence, that is, the moment the DPP and the OPP and the Police all agree that murder has been done and you did it, you are in legal terms 'Under Warrant'.. any police force can arrest you anywhere in AU, so for that reason, I am assuming his arrest, 'Under Warrant', was for murder,, .. to what degree, that I do not know, we don't have degrees of murder here, in that sort of categorical sense, but there are permutations, not often used but they are in the rule book.

As far as I can tell, it just Murder, which is huge in itself, the only crime bigger is treason.

 

[SouthAussie]

I wonder if the accused did something stupid, like throw Sam's phone into a local dumpster that was within CCTV range. Like a supermarket dumpster or some other business that monitors their dumpster.

The police never requested that people keep a lookout for Sam's phone, by providing info to the public about her phone.

 

[Toowong(s)]

So a moment of clarity for me then, as while elaborate theories are good reading, things are usually a lot simpler and more mundane “for real life” as Bluey would say.

IMO what went down went something along these lines:

1. On 3rd Feb the accused went on an all night bender, leaving his Ute/truck wherever he started, and went back for it around 8am the next morning to get it home.

2. On 4th Feb the accused was driving under influence and took backroads to avoid the risk of losing his licence. Difficult to work as an electrician without a drivers licence, it’s a tradies lifeblood.

3. The accused struck SM with the vehicle, panicked, deliberately caused her death by refusing to call help, and instead performed a deliberate act to end SMs life, then put the body in the vehicle, smashed SMs devices with a rock and/or threw them into a dam or similar, then drove to another place, and hid the body. All to protect his own livelihood and life.

4. MM reported SM missing around 11am, after undertaking his own searches, calling friends, etc around the period 9am to 11am.

5. Police searching from 11am onwards on the 4th March.

6. After 4 weeks of searching and investigating police finally received access to a swath of phone data. Article on 4th March:

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/update-in-search-for-missing-mum-as-police-probe-mobile-data/news-story/66e90d31da5a55a618ddcc26d860ff3d?amp

7. Analysis of the data, which is presumably done digitally and quickly, revealed the accused phone was pinging in the area on the morning of 4th Feb around 8am.

8. The accused is arrested on Wednesday 6th March, 2 days after reports of the phone data dump, under suspicion of involvement due to phone pings and taken in to custody for questioning.

9. Two properties (Mt Clear and Scottsburn) are searched and the accused vehicle is seized. Somewhere in amongst all this police find a “smoking gun” that confirms SM is dead, and due to the extent of the injury, it is obvious was deliberately made so.

All I can think of that would be so specific to support the charges as they have been laid out, including time of death and place of death, is a morbid video or photos. This tells police the location and the time and it’s clear SM has been deliberately killed. I am reminded of the Richard Pusey case who, high on drugs, morbidly filmed police officers dying at the scene of an accident, instead of helping them:

Australian jailed for filming dying police officers - BBC News

Richard Pusey is sentenced to 10 months jail for filming dying police officers at a crash scene.

www.bbc.com

 

[Dr Samoht]

I wonder if the accused did something stupid, like throw Sam's phone into a local dumpster that was within CCTV range. Like a supermarket dumpster or some other business that monitors their dumpster.

The police never requested that people keep a lookout for Sam's phone, by providing info to the public about her phone.

Good point , extending this further to any public rubbish bin and also domestic household bins perhaps put out on the Sunday for Monday emptying ( different areas have different day of the week collection ) . Police could check with local councils regards this .

 

[SouthAussie]

One of the places where I work has a permanent dumpster.

If the police asked for CCTV of a time period, then saw a random throw something in that dumpster when they were reviewing the CCTV, there is a good chance that something could still be in the dumpster - as the tradies only call for a bin changeover when the dumpster is full. Takes 2/3/4 (variable) weeks for the tradies to fill the bin with their job junk.

Just thinking that checking bins and dumpsters (and CCTV overlooking bins and dumpsters) might have been part of the search, seeing that "items" like Lesley Trotter being dumped into a rubbish truck can happen when a person goes missing.

 

[Dr Samoht]

Ont

So a moment of clarity for me then, as while elaborate theories are good reading, things are usually a lot simpler and more mundane “for real life” as Bluey would say.

IMO what went down went something along these lines:

1. On 3rd Feb the accused went on an all night bender, leaving his Ute/truck wherever he started, and went back for it around 8am the next morning to get it home.

2. On 4th Feb the accused was driving under influence and took backroads to avoid the risk of losing his licence. Difficult to work as an electrician without a drivers licence, it’s a tradies lifeblood.

3. The accused struck SM with the vehicle, panicked, deliberately caused her death by refusing to call help, and instead performed a deliberate act to end SMs life, then put the body in the vehicle, smashed SMs devices with a rock and/or threw them into a dam or similar, then drove to another place, and hid the body. All to protect his own livelihood and life.

4. MM reported SM missing around 11am, after undertaking his own searches, calling friends, etc around the period 9am to 11am.

5. Police searching from 11am onwards on the 4th March.

6. After 4 weeks of searching and investigating police finally received access to a swath of phone data. Article on 4th March:

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/update-in-search-for-missing-mum-as-police-probe-mobile-data/news-story/66e90d31da5a55a618ddcc26d860ff3d?amp

7. Analysis of the data, which is presumably done digitally and quickly, revealed the accused phone was pinging in the area on the morning of 4th Feb around 8am.

8. The accused is arrested on Wednesday 6th March, 2 days after reports of the phone data dump, under suspicion of involvement due to phone pings and taken in to custody for questioning.

9. Two properties (Mt Clear and Scottsburn) are searched and the accused vehicle is seized. Somewhere in amongst all this police find a “smoking gun” that confirms SM is dead, and due to the extent of the injury, it is obvious was deliberately made so.

All I can think of that would be so specific to support the charges as they have been laid out, including time of death and place of death, is a morbid video or photos. This tells police the location and the time and it’s clear SM has been deliberately killed. I am reminded of the Richard Pusey case who, high on drugs, morbidly filmed police officers dying at the scene of an accident, instead of helping them:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-56910687.amp[

Interesting theory … the timeline on point 1. … might work better with a return to collect his Ute around 6.00 am Sunday .
OMO.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

So a moment of clarity for me then, as while elaborate theories are good reading, things are usually a lot simpler and more mundane “for real life” as Bluey would say.

IMO what went down went something along these lines:

1. On 3rd Feb the accused went on an all night bender, leaving his Ute/truck wherever he started, and went back for it around 8am the next morning to get it home.

2. On 4th Feb the accused was driving under influence and took backroads to avoid the risk of losing his licence. Difficult to work as an electrician without a drivers licence, it’s a tradies lifeblood.

3. The accused struck SM with the vehicle, panicked, deliberately caused her death by refusing to call help, and instead performed a deliberate act to end SMs life, then put the body in the vehicle, smashed SMs devices with a rock and/or threw them into a dam or similar, then drove to another place, and hid the body. All to protect his own livelihood and life.

4. MM reported SM missing around 11am, after undertaking his own searches, calling friends, etc around the period 9am to 11am.

5. Police searching from 11am onwards on the 4th March.

6. After 4 weeks of searching and investigating police finally received access to a swath of phone data. Article on 4th March:

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/update-in-search-for-missing-mum-as-police-probe-mobile-data/news-story/66e90d31da5a55a618ddcc26d860ff3d?amp

7. Analysis of the data, which is presumably done digitally and quickly, revealed the accused phone was pinging in the area on the morning of 4th Feb around 8am.

8. The accused is arrested on Wednesday 6th March, 2 days after reports of the phone data dump, under suspicion of involvement due to phone pings and taken in to custody for questioning.

9. Two properties (Mt Clear and Scottsburn) are searched and the accused vehicle is seized. Somewhere in amongst all this police find a “smoking gun” that confirms SM is dead, and due to the extent of the injury, it is obvious was deliberately made so.

All I can think of that would be so specific to support the charges as they have been laid out, including time of death and place of death, is a morbid video or photos. This tells police the location and the time and it’s clear SM has been deliberately killed. I am reminded of the Richard Pusey case who, high on drugs, morbidly filmed police officers dying at the scene of an accident, instead of helping them:

Australian jailed for filming dying police officers - BBC News

Richard Pusey is sentenced to 10 months jail for filming dying police officers at a crash scene.

www.bbc.com

I think you're pretty spot on. IMHO

 

[louisepiglet]

So a moment of clarity for me then, as while elaborate theories are good reading, things are usually a lot simpler and more mundane “for real life” as Bluey would say.

IMO what went down went something along these lines:

1. On 3rd Feb the accused went on an all night bender, leaving his Ute/truck wherever he started, and went back for it around 8am the next morning to get it home.

2. On 4th Feb the accused was driving under influence and took backroads to avoid the risk of losing his licence. Difficult to work as an electrician without a drivers licence, it’s a tradies lifeblood.

3. The accused struck SM with the vehicle, panicked, deliberately caused her death by refusing to call help, and instead performed a deliberate act to end SMs life, then put the body in the vehicle, smashed SMs devices with a rock and/or threw them into a dam or similar, then drove to another place, and hid the body. All to protect his own livelihood and life.

4. MM reported SM missing around 11am, after undertaking his own searches, calling friends, etc around the period 9am to 11am.

5. Police searching from 11am onwards on the 4th March.

6. After 4 weeks of searching and investigating police finally received access to a swath of phone data. Article on 4th March:

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/update-in-search-for-missing-mum-as-police-probe-mobile-data/news-story/66e90d31da5a55a618ddcc26d860ff3d?amp

7. Analysis of the data, which is presumably done digitally and quickly, revealed the accused phone was pinging in the area on the morning of 4th Feb around 8am.

8. The accused is arrested on Wednesday 6th March, 2 days after reports of the phone data dump, under suspicion of involvement due to phone pings and taken in to custody for questioning.

9. Two properties (Mt Clear and Scottsburn) are searched and the accused vehicle is seized. Somewhere in amongst all this police find a “smoking gun” that confirms SM is dead, and due to the extent of the injury, it is obvious was deliberately made so.

All I can think of that would be so specific to support the charges as they have been laid out, including time of death and place of death, is a morbid video or photos. This tells police the location and the time and it’s clear SM has been deliberately killed. I am reminded of the Richard Pusey case who, high on drugs, morbidly filmed police officers dying at the scene of an accident, instead of helping them:

Australian jailed for filming dying police officers - BBC News

Richard Pusey is sentenced to 10 months jail for filming dying police officers at a crash scene.

www.bbc.com

I concur with your theory. I feel all those theorising about stalking and a preplanned attack are thinking too far into left field. I feel the reason that LE are calling it a"deliberate" act is the fact that he decided not to call for help when he knew this would lead to Samantha's death and then covered it up.

 

[Dotta]

I only wonder why,
as the "bender" finished at 3 a.m.,
the alleged perp was driving home so late - at 7/8 a.m.?

If he had to return to get the car,
why to take car at all?