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 #6

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
nightpaw said:
Can I ask exactly why you presume by his “looks” that he would not be capable of such an incident?.. As this is a big statement. And further what does someone that can create this kind of alleged destruction look like to you?
Click to expand...
He is definitely benefitting from perks of being a younger, seemingly ‘healthy’, white-male who is socially integrated in society. Rightly or wrongly. Such individuals fly low on people’s radar when people are picturing heinous criminals. Same token, same individuals are possibly very well practiced at exploiting these traits and using to their advantage when lying and obfuscating personal responsibility.
 
Last edited:
BoysTown said:
IMO…Sounds very much like impulsive ADHD
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying but I don't think it feels right, either. Most people with ADHD don't murder other people; I think it's got to do with something else, more personality-wise perhaps. Don't think the allegedly taking drugs helped. Neurotypical people can have dramatically lowered inhibitions, has nothing to do with ADHD. IMO MOO
 
SouthAussie said:
Somebody must have dobbed him in. He must have told someone, or maybe someone (girlfriend?) was present at the time.

The police seem to have a high level of information to go for "a deliberate attack ... murder, intent to kill".

imo
Click to expand...
This is a small outline of how the VIctorian Police, and the DPP conclude that someone is to be charged with murder...

The legal definition of murder​

Murder is defined as the unlawful and intentional killing of another human being by a person of sound mind, who has no legal reason to do so. The degree of blame therefore separate out charges of manslaughter and murder, with manslaughter having two degrees of blame: voluntary and involuntary. Murder can result in a life prison sentence, where manslaughter can result in 20 years in prison.

Murder (homicide)​

In a murder, the prosecution must prove that the accused had the intention to kill, an intention to inflict grievous and serious bodily harm, or had a reckless indifference to human life. The accused must have been able to foresee that their actions – or indeed a failure to act – would result in the death of the victim.

It was not an accident. It was not an unfortunate intersection , unforseen and unavoidable. The death was intentional. The killer must have been sober enough, or clearheaded enough to judge his actions or lack of action to preserve life. ( failure to act ) ..
 
mamamama9873 said:
I agree with the original poster. (see what I did there) looks like the boy next door. It is stereotyping, yes but I personally would generally not sense any danger from this kind of person who seemingly had a stable family, a career, friends, not tattoos plastered all over his body, full set of teeth etc. Generally I would expect someone capable of such a crime that is so senseless, without a clear motive driving him there to look a lot ‘rougher’, like the person has lived a much rougher life. IMO
Click to expand...
So, as times are changing, these things need to be known, stated, and restated. We must all go by our guts regarding sensing danger, yes. But it's important to realize things like facial cues, body language, expression are what we should judge by. Not such things as you've listed here.

Plenty of wonderful people have
  • LOTS of tattoos (even face tattoos, yes!),
  • bad teeth (dental care in many places is insanely expensive),
  • dentures,
  • no friends (especially after COVID)
  • just a few friends,
  • no career,
  • no degree,
  • a disability & get paid that way,
  • odd jobs,
  • friends or roommates they live with,
  • family they still live with,
  • and aren't making a nuclear family of their own (just yet, anyway)
and this is a more and more common thing with our society, and it needs to be accepted and the stereotype needs to be squashed.

People some find "poor" or "ugly" aren't more likely to commit crime.
1709937102016.png1709937212162.png
1709937247695.png
1709937385943.png
(Ted Bundy, Jeff Dahmer, Rohinie Bisesar, Cameron Herrin - Cameron has a following of people trying to get him acquitted for killing a mom and daughter in a reckless driving case purely due to the fact he is handsome)
 
Trooper said:
This is a small outline of how the VIctorian Police, and the DPP conclude that someone is to be charged with murder...

The legal definition of murder​

Murder is defined as the unlawful and intentional killing of another human being by a person of sound mind, who has no legal reason to do so. The degree of blame therefore separate out charges of manslaughter and murder, with manslaughter having two degrees of blame: voluntary and involuntary. Murder can result in a life prison sentence, where manslaughter can result in 20 years in prison.

Murder (homicide)​

In a murder, the prosecution must prove that the accused had the intention to kill, an intention to inflict grievous and serious bodily harm, or had a reckless indifference to human life. The accused must have been able to foresee that their actions – or indeed a failure to act – would result in the death of the victim.

It was not an accident. It was not an unfortunate intersection , unforseen and unavoidable. The death was intentional. The killer must have been sober enough, or clearheaded enough to judge his actions or lack of action to preserve life. ( failure to act ) ..
Click to expand...

Can anyone elaborate on "or had a reckless indifference to human life"?
 
Lots of degree's of murder in the VIctorian System..

Defensive homicide​

Defensive homicide is an outdated law that no longer exists in Victoria, which was designed to protect battered women and mental impaired people who commit murder from the full brunt of murder charges, due to moral culpability being reduced. The law was set up in 2005, and retracted in 2014. There are calls to bring this law back, with Victoria and Tasmania the only states in Australia to not have a ‘halfway house’ law for the inbetweeners.

Constructive murder (homicide)​

Constructive murder is also known as felony murder, and refers to the death that occurs while a person is committing another serious crime. A ‘serious crime’ in this instance refers to a crime that is punishable by 25 years or more in prison, like aggravated robbery. No consideration is given to the accused’s state of mind when they caused the death, so it doesn’t matter if they intended to kill or not.

Involuntary manslaughter​

Involuntary manslaughter involves an unlawful killing without intent, for example in a car accident caused by reckless driving or committing an illegal or dangerous act. The prosecution must prove that the death was caused by an illegal act or omission, an act of neglect, or a departure from the standard of care any reasonable person could expect, not occurring would cause serious injury or death.



But the VICPOL have charged him with Murder, nothing Defensive, Constructive, or Involuntary about it, at all. Straight for the throat plain uniced Murder, no frills, no frippery at all. Which means, he is charged with killing her deliberately, with intention, with reckless regard for her life, and with a bit of malice thrown in. Nothing mitigating like drugs, or alcohol, or a'mental episode'...

Also, VICPOL are in the drivers seat on this one, they hold the bargaining chips.. he may think he does by not saying where the body is, but that won't bother VICPOL they have him sitting in their cells, and there he stays till the moon turns blue, they'll find her body one way or the other with or without his assistance, he does not have any chips to lay down.
 
Last edited:
BoysTown said:

Some of those closest to Mr Stephenson, including his former St Patrick’s College classmates, told the Herald Sun he was often on the outer and that he struggled with his mental health.

They said welfare staff at St Patrick’s College dealt with frequent “outbursts”.

He was described as showing some eccentric behaviour and was sometimes bullied at school.

Those former classmates said his mental health concerns were well known.
Click to expand...
you could say all this about me as well in my times in school and yet, never felt the urge to murder a random lady jogging. these sorts of things always come off excuse-y to me. hope he's not planning on pleading GBRI (though those cases hardly pan out toward that outcome, and things still suck for defendant with that outcome which people tend to forget)
 
Voluspa said:
Can anyone elaborate on "or had a reckless indifference to human life"?
Click to expand...
It is deemed that a normal person, with normal faculties, carrying all the cultural input of the environment , would know when to call for medical help, and when to stop beating someone to death. Basically, that's what it is, although, in court, it will be more defined, and more elaborate, but boiled down. that's what it is.

A chosen desire to continue to extinguish someone else's life. ( continue, is the key , and 'chosen'' is the lock)
 
Neet_Mc said:
He is definitely benefitting from perks of being a younger, seemingly ‘healthy’, white-male who is socially integrated in society. Rightly or wrongly. Such individuals fly low on people’s radar when people are picturing heinous criminals. Same token, same individuals are possibly very well practiced at exploiting these traits and using to their advantage when lying and obfuscating personal responsibility.
Click to expand...
Yes societies inability to think critically is the reason that a high percentage of inmates are falsely incarcerated and a high percentage of crimes remain unsolved with “normal looking one of the boys” types walking around free.
And a lot of neighbors/family/friends that don’t come forward with information due to someone looking like a model citizen.
 
I am perplexed as to how they are so certain of murder in the absence of a body. I actually don’t feel the car was the cause of death but it was identifiable by its damage .
I feel he was on foot and killed her then went for his car to remove her. If they crossed paths at 7 am , perhaps he partied super late and was walking home.
The fact they can charge him means the proof they have must be eg a weapon or video or her dna in his vehicle in my opinion.
 
SLouTh said:
It is totally senseless…..He should have called 000 for an ambulance and Police …. Instead of trying to hide it … presumably, an ill advised / not thought out attempt to keep his license for his job, independence etc

If he grew up in the local area, and had a 4WD then he would likely know a lot of secluded spots in all that forrest area ….

I just hope his parents may be able to talk him into revealing where Sam’s body is ???

IMO
Click to expand...

There could be others involved in helping him or know what happened , but haven't gone to the police.

I don't think this is over yet

Some close to him, could have dobbed him in as well

I hate saying this, but as police are saying it was a Deliberate Act

He still could have used his car deliberately to kill her or injure her badly to sexually assault her and then has disposed of her body

Possibly another reason why he won't reveal her body at the moment, as police could find more evidence and charges

Victoria Police Commissioner Shane Patton said police believed the murder was "a deliberate act" and "not a hit-and-run".
However, he did not confirm whether police believed a car or drugs and alcohol had been involved.
"I'm not going to speculate on any other details about the death other than it was deliberate," Patton said.
 
I understand why people are always shocked when someone who has committed a heinous crime looks just like the boy next door. We really, really want the monsters to look like monsters. If they do, we can be sure we'd recognize them right away and run the other way. "No way would that monster have gotten me," we think, "I'd have recognized him for what he was right away!"

It's very, very uncomfortable to look at someone who has done something horrific and realize how much he looks like us, or like someone we love and trust, and have to confront the sobering reality that we would probably not have run the other way at all, and would have suffered the same fate as anyone else.
 
iusedtofloat said:
So, as times are changing, these things need to be known, stated, and restated. We must all go by our guts regarding sensing danger, yes. But it's important to realize things like facial cues, body language, expression are what we should judge by. Not such things as you've listed here.

Plenty of wonderful people have
  • LOTS of tattoos (even face tattoos, yes!),
  • bad teeth (dental care in many places is insanely expensive),
  • dentures,
  • no friends (especially after COVID)
  • just a few friends,
  • no career,
  • no degree,
  • a disability & get paid that way,
  • odd jobs,
  • friends or roommates they live with,
  • family they still live with,
  • and aren't making a nuclear family of their own (just yet, anyway)
and this is a more and more common thing with our society, and it needs to be accepted and the stereotype needs to be squashed.

People some find "poor" or "ugly" aren't more likely to commit crime.
View attachment 489012View attachment 489013
View attachment 489014
View attachment 489015
(Ted Bundy, Jeff Dahmer, Rohinie Bisesar, Cameron Herrin - Cameron has a following of people trying to get him acquitted for killing a mom and daughter in a reckless driving case purely due to the fact he is handsome)
Click to expand...

Hestia's Fire said:
I understand why people are always shocked when someone who has committed a heinous crime looks just like the boy next door. We really, really want the monsters to look like monsters. If they do, we can be sure we'd recognize them right away and run the other way. "No way would that monster have gotten me," we think, "I'd have recognized him for what he was right away!"

It's very, very uncomfortable to look at someone who has done something horrific and realize how much he looks like us, or like someone we love and trust, and have to confront the sobering reality that we would probably not have run the other way at all, and would have suffered the same fate as anyone else.
Click to expand...
Yes exactly that’s what it is - we want to justify it to ourselves and argue that it couldn’t/ wouldn’t happen to us. It does sit very uncomfortably that someone who looks so “normal” is capable of such an act but it is the reality.
 
When I was watching UI a couple of weeks ago, I remember thinking that something stood out uncomfortably regarding repeated references to the mineshafts and comments re them being an ideal place to conceal a body as if a body was dumped there it would most likely never be found…. At the time I thought “why are they broadcasting this?” As it seemed almost like they were planting a seed to a potential killer of a way to commit a “perfect crime”. In light of what we know now, I’m wondering if the police did suspect Samantha’s body had been removed and were hoping to bait the perpetrator into taking the body to a mineshaft? Especially if they had him under 24/7 surveillance st the time? I may be completely wrong, but just a thought… MOO…
 
Rumination1 said:
I am perplexed as to how they are so certain of murder in the absence of a body. I actually don’t feel the car was the cause of death but it was identifiable by its damage .
I feel he was on foot and killed her then went for his car to remove her. If they crossed paths at 7 am , perhaps he partied super late and was walking home.
The fact they can charge him means the proof they have must be eg a weapon or video or her dna in his vehicle in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I agree. I feel he was on foot too. When I watched the investigative program on TV, they made it sound like her last location was not accessible by car. I haven't looked at any maps of that location, though
 
SouthAussie said:
.
Samantha Murphy case reignites calls to change ‘no body, no parole’ law

Calling for "no body, no release" again.

If the accused is found guilty, being such a young age, he could be out when in his 40s. Sam's family will never be freed from what he allegedly did.

imo
Click to expand...
Since this took place in Victoria, which, in deed does have no body , no parole, Mr S will be sitting there till Armageddon, unless he talks.

I think in Victoria, it is a life sentence for murder, but the kicker is, when is he eligible for parole... this is where things get into the political realm, to a certain extent... there are a few prisoners in VIC who are, certainly, eligible for parole, but being eligible, and actually getting parole has a huge gulf between those two actions.

Julian Knight, as one example, has been eligible for parole for yonks, he'll probably never get it, as letting him out would be a knockout blow to any VIC Premier... could be the same with this young bloke, considering the Hi Vis crime scene.. .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 152 more.
Total: 2,734 (members: 153, guests: 2,581)

Online statistics

Members online
153
Guests online
2,581
Total visitors
2,734
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,796
Messages
17,992,565
Members
229,237
Latest member
Blushybomb
Back
Top