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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Possible phone tapping work sophisticated spyware that allowed full control of his phone from viewing history, microphone and camera access etc.

Maybe he was having conversations with himself that they listened to

I'd say its others that have some sort of account of what happened that morning....

MOO... it won't be entirely phone data that will be the reason behind the Police charging the accused with murder.
 
It's interesting to wonder what was the piece of evidence that connected the accused to the crime....

Perhaps a ping from a mobile phone.... the Police would still need to be extremely sure that the accused was the one who was carrying the mobile phone that "pinged"....not pehaps someone else driving a car that contained a mobile phone connected to the accused and the accused was actually in bed recovering from a bender the night before....

In the the accused's defence... that is important!

The Police will have a very accurate account of the accused's movements from others that were with him etc.. but they obviously don't have an account of the moments after Samantha's disappearance....so how do they know it’s "that person" that was who murdered Samantha?

The Police know a lot more than we're privy to and obviously know that the accused 'must' be the perpetrator..... its interesting to wonder what it was exactly that made them so sure.
I think we should look to the Under Investigation program for clues.

Now that we know the police made an arrest exactly one week after the program aired, they were probably putting all that talk out there about a stalker to jog someone's memory and get them to come forward.

Maybe someone remembered that an acquaintance or family member recently changed their routine to early morning bush runs, or had a history of being a violent stalker. The theory had never been thrown out there until the program aired.

Edit: and someone possibly with an obsession with mine shafts :( Perhaps police aren't searching because they know it’s a mine shaft and they're waiting to be told where it's located :(
 
Last edited:
Does his previous school hold cadets classes (high school introduction to military training)?

Would be the only logical non-suspicious reason I could think of for wearing an army uniform, other than being in the army... which he wasn't.
Looks like Ballarat has an Army Cadet unit:


He could also be in the Army Reserves.
 
It's interesting to wonder what was the piece of evidence that connected the accused to the crime....

Perhaps a ping from a mobile phone.... the Police would still need to be extremely sure that the accused was the one who was carrying the mobile phone that "pinged"....not pehaps someone else driving a car that contained a mobile phone connected to the accused and the accused was actually in bed recovering from a bender the night before....

In the the accused's defence... that is important!

The Police will have a very accurate account of the accused's movements from others that were with him etc.. but they obviously don't have an account of the moments after Samantha's disappearance....so how do they know it’s "that person" that was who murdered Samantha?

The Police know a lot more than we're privy to and obviously know that the accused 'must' be the perpetrator..... its interesting to wonder what it was exactly that made them so sure.

They would have evidence of some kind...



Police could have found items in his house when they searched, including SM clothing, maybe her phone and watch traces of blood, weapon or something used to have kill, his clothing, he could have a balaclava, rope. DNA

His phone might hold a lot of evidence, phone ping with SM, photos, videos, conversations etc...

We don't know If the accused has admitted to anything with the police in those 30 hours of police questioning him

Witnesses / friends have come forward, dobbed him in after he told someone what he has done

Recorded under police intelligence
 
That's an odd thing to do, surely--to change between secondary schools that are located quite close to one another.
Not necessarily, if he wanted to do a subject or follow a sport ( or maybe cadets) that was not offered at the other school - although personally ( being in Qld & understanding this school system) I would make the change at Gr 9

Jmo.
 
They would have evidence of some kind...



Police could have found items in his house when they searched, including SM clothing, maybe her phone and watch traces of blood, weapon or something used to have kill, his clothing, he could have a balaclava, rope. DNA

His phone might hold a lot of evidence, phone ping with SM, photos, videos, conversations etc...

We don't know If the accused has admitted to anything with the police in those 30 hours of police questioning him

Witnesses / friends have come forward, dobbed him in after he told someone what he has done

Recorded under police intelligence

By all accounts the accused is not saying anything.

My guess is that there are witness accounts that have linked everything for investigators.... enough for a charge to be laid.

But were is Samantha? Possibly a long way away from the crime scene... the accused is probably hoping this part of the crime will play in to his favour....time will tell.
 
Last edited:
By all accounts the accused is not saying anything.

My guess is that there is someone else that has spoken to Police that has linked everything for investigators.... enough for a charge to be laid.

But were is Samantha? Possibly a long way away from the crime scene... the accused is probably hoping this part of the crime will play in to his favour....time will tell.
JMO. If the accused tells where the body is that would be an admission to murder. I'm guessing he thinks there is not enough evidence and if he says nothing he might get off. MOO
 
Looks like Ballarat has an Army Cadet unit:


He could also be in the Army Reserves.
Could be overthinking the whole Army Cadets idea. I lived in and around Ballarat in my youth and Ballarat (to this day) has a very large shop called Aussie Disposals, which carried genuine (second hand) Army surplus. I remember my brother buying a genuine Army uniform there years ago. Very easy to get your hands on these items at that shop.
 
They would have evidence of some kind...



Police could have found items in his house when they searched, including SM clothing, maybe her phone and watch traces of blood, weapon or something used to have kill, his clothing, he could have a balaclava, rope. DNA

His phone might hold a lot of evidence, phone ping with SM, photos, videos, conversations etc...

We don't know If the accused has admitted to anything with the police in those 30 hours of police questioning him

Witnesses / friends have come forward, dobbed him in after he told someone what he has done

Recorded under police intelligence
They identified him in 2 weeks but then followed him for 2 more weeks before an arrest. They didn't have a slam-dunk for 2 more weeks. I am guessing that they had phone data initially linking him to the same location at the same time when her data stopped, and he has a history of SA. Then they went back and found CCTV of him, possibly from his own home.
 
They identified him in 2 weeks but then followed him for 2 more weeks before an arrest. They didn't have a slam-dunk for 2 more weeks. I am guessing that they had phone data initially linking him to the same location at the same time when her data stopped, and he has a history of SA. Then they went back and found CCTV of him, possibly from his own home.

"They'd" need more than that....
 
Agree-

After they questioned him and then arrested him, they seized a lot of his property. MOO they identified some forensic evidence from his truck.
Would they need a lot before hand to seize his property ..or would his phone pinging and maybe this CCTV be enough.. (if the phone pinging actually showed him, we don't know that yet?)
 
Agree-

After they questioned him and then arrested him, they seized a lot of his property. MOO they identified some forensic evidence from his truck.

I sort of agree there...

Charging someone for murder.....requires knowledge of a crime that investigators are 'certain' of..... so before they arrest someone.

The police may arrest someone that they suspect committed a crime but would need to be almost certain that the individual in question is the one that has committed murder...before an arrest is made...in this case.

Murder is an extremely high bar! Extreme accusations requires extremely good evidence!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
4,061
Total visitors
4,173

Forum statistics

Threads
593,658
Messages
17,990,475
Members
229,198
Latest member
pigg7457
Back
Top