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 #8

[BreakingNews]

DBM

 

[Deleted member 293720]

Officers recently obtained videos from a light industrial and residential area, with homes and businesses in Elsworth, Joseph and Butt streets confirming police requested their security footage.

Elsworth St leads to bushland managed by Parks Victoria.

It is not known if any of the footage obtained shows Ms Murphy or any vehicles of interest.

Officers have also searched the area, which includes car detailing, roller-door and gymnasium businesses.




* Possibly SM, Could have been taken firstly to an Industrial building

And then later sadly dumped somewhere

If this was the case, hopefully police have got some DNA and other evidence as well

 

[Passerby80]

Yes. all this. and more, all under the umbrella of murder . The point being, the police Commander ruled out, categorically, the concept of hit and run in this instance.

Unsavoury as it is to consider, indeed, but there it is. Not a hit and run incident. Not my opinion, but what the Police Commander, Shane Patton stated in a press conference, in answer to a specific question regarding some involvement of a vehicle.

I understand and respect what you're saying. But in the moment he was asked "was it a hit and run" and he paused briefly before responding "no", an alternative interpretation could be that if LE were alleging that Samantha died directly due to some other means undertaken by the perpetrator subsequent to an incident with a vehicle, he may have felt it more accurate to reply "no" to her death being a hit and run

 

[Black-Cat]

It is possible it could be held in Melbourne, but it is not likely, in my opinion. Most likely , it will be held in Ballarat. For these reasons..

It is the community where the crime took place, it is where he comes from, and it is where his victim comes from. It is a Ballarat community matter , and, the accused is entitled to a jury of his peers, from his neighborhood, so to speak. Her family are entitled to a court near home, to lessen travel stress. His family, also, is entitled to the same consideration.

Ballarat is on the circuit of the Supreme Court, it is a regional city, it's not a little town, Supreme court cases have been held there before, it's not a new thing to Ballarat. In fact, Ballarat has a magnificent court house, from memory. I hope it has not been pulled down and some concrete ghastliness put up.

The problem lies in jury selection. However, juries are properly instructed and any difficulties winnowed out. And the selection pool would encompass the entire Shire of Ballarat, quite a large area. There would not be many of his peers available for jury duty, not many 22 yr old men put themselves down for jury duty, not many are ratepayers, at that age, so it would not be exactly 'of his peers'..

Any juror on that trial would already know they are up for jury duty this year, or early next year. Everyone is sent a letter, first to tell you that you are on the list, then to ask you if you can do it, or do you have commitments that make it difficult. This is sent way way early, so no one is wondering for long about jury duty.

I would think he would not be transported up the Ballarat and back to Melbourne every day. It would be done by video, but maybe that might be the way it goes, .. I would be surprised by that, though.

Sorry Troop

 

[Trooper]

I presume that is the new court house at Ballarat? .. aghh. however, it is rather beautiful in it's own right. I am impressed, thanks for the heads up about it. Been a long time since I was in Ballarat.

 

[Trooper]

I understand and respect what you're saying. But in the moment he was asked "was it a hit and run" and he paused briefly before responding "no", an alternative interpretation could be that if LE were alleging that Samantha died directly due to some other means undertaken by the perpetrator subsequent to an incident with a vehicle, he may have felt it more accurate to reply "no" to her death being a hit and run

Oh well. Sure.

 

[Passerby80]

View attachment 494507

Officers recently obtained videos from a light industrial and residential area, with homes and businesses in Elsworth, Joseph and Butt streets confirming police requested their security footage.

Elsworth St leads to bushland managed by Parks Victoria.

It is not known if any of the footage obtained shows Ms Murphy or any vehicles of interest.

Officers have also searched the area, which includes car detailing, roller-door and gymnasium businesses.




* Possibly SM, Could have been taken firstly to an Industrial building

And then later sadly dumped somewhere

If this was the case, hopefully police have got some DNA and other evidence as well




View attachment 494511


View attachment 494508

I wonder if PS was a member at that gym (its pretty popular with young blokes) and went there on the day Samantha disappeared and used the showers.

 

[JLZ]

It is unclear what specific evidence led police to Stephenson's arrest.

However, it's understood a large part of Victoria Police's investigation was CCTV footage from around East Ballarat.

Officers recently obtained videos from a light industrial and residential area, with homes and businesses in Elsworth, Joseph and Butt streets confirming police requested their security footage.

Elsworth St leads to bushland managed by Parks Victoria.

It is not known if any of the footage obtained shows Ms Murphy or any vehicles of interest.

Officers have also searched the area, which includes car detailing, roller-door and gymnasium businesses.


* Possibly SM, Could have been taken firstly to an Industrial building

And then later sadly dumped somewhere

If this was the case, hopefully police have got some DNA and other evidence as well

What life will be like in prison for Sam Murphy's alleged killer

An ex-inmate has spoken out about what jail could be like for the man accused of killing mother-of-three Samantha Murphy.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Was that searching before the arrest?

I have been thinking it went something like this: police said, look, your phones show you were at the same place at the same time, and your car . . . well, we know she was in your car; just tell us, was there an accident? You were taking her to hospital perhaps, but she died? And the accused said, no, no, well there was a woman, it might have been Mrs Murphy, I think it must have been. She was lost and I gave her a lift. Only for two or three minutes and then she said she knew where she was. I set her down near Elsworth Street. There was no accident while she was with me. She was alive and well, got out of the car. Something must have happened to her afterwards.

 

[Deleted member 293720]

I understand and respect what you're saying. But in the moment he was asked "was it a hit and run" and he paused briefly before responding "no", an alternative interpretation could be that if LE were alleging that Samantha died directly due to some other means undertaken by the perpetrator subsequent to an incident with a vehicle, he may have felt it more accurate to reply "no" to her death being a hit and run

Was that searching before the arrest?

I have been thinking it went something like this: police said, look, your phones show you were at the same place at the same time, and your car . . . well, we know she was in your car; just tell us, was there an accident? You were taking her to hospital perhaps, but she died? And the accused said, no, no, well there was a woman, it might have been Mrs Murphy, I think it must have been. She was lost and I gave her a lift. Only for two or three minutes and then she said she knew where she was. I set her down near Elsworth Street. There was no accident while she was with me. She was alive and well, got out of the car. Something must have happened to her afterwards.

After the arrest

And nope.

The accused has said nothing to the police and is not co-operating

 

[JLZ]

After the arrest

And nope.

The accused has said nothing to the police and is not co-operating

How do you know he's said nothing? Including before the arrest? As to not co-operating, I suppose falling into a trap and telling disprovable lies is co-operating in a sense, but I think they mean . . . not intentionally co-operating.

 

[Deleted member 293720]

How do you know he's said nothing? Including before the arrest? As to not co-operating, I suppose falling into a trap and telling disprovable lies is co-operating in a sense, but I think they mean . . . not intentionally co-operating.

He is not talking. Full stop

30 hours in custody, he has sat there, saying nothing

Has been advised by his legal rep

He keeps his mouth shut and is hoping the police can't find SM and there is no damming evidence against him

And he is hoping for acquittal




Plenty of media reports have stated this

 

[JLZ]

He is not talking. Full stop

30 hours in custody, he has sat there, saying nothing

Plenty of media reports have stated this

I thought what they said was that he hasn't confessed and isn't co-operating.

 

[Trooper]

How do you know he's said nothing? Including before the arrest? As to not co-operating, I suppose falling into a trap and telling disprovable lies is co-operating in a sense, but I think they mean . . . not intentionally co-operating.

One way that I can tell he has said nothing is because Shane Patton said so. Asked if the suspect has said anything in response to this charge, the Commander replied, 'nothing. He has said nothing.'... So it is reasonable to accept that Mr Stephenson has said nothing. Some posters have thought he is saying 'no comment'' to the charges, but Patton was convincing in his claim that the accused has said precisely nothing. Not even 'no comment'..

What he has said, or not said to his lawyer, or Barrister, who ever that is, is not known. And will not be known unless the Barrister decides to tell the press, and that scenario is highly unlikely, unless a firm denial and a claim of innocence is conveyed. Which has not been done,, as yet.

As far as is known , the only word that has been reported that the accused HAS said, was at his Magistrates hearing, early on, via ZOOM, and the magistrate in Ballarat asked Mr S. in his cell in Melbourne Remand, 'can you hear me, Mr. Stephenson?'.. and the accused replied, 'Yes'. and that, folks, is it. That's all he has said.

 

[Deleted member 293720]

I thought what they said was that he hasn't confessed and isn't co-operating.

The Herald Sun reports the 22-year-old has reserved his right to remain silent, giving detectives little to no help as they continue to try to locate Ms Murphy's remains.

 

[JLZ]

One way that I can tell he has said nothing is because Shane Patton said so. Asked if the suspect has said anything in response to this charge, the Commander replied, 'nothing. He has said nothing.'... So it is reasonable to accept that Mr Stephenson has said nothing. Some posters have thought he is saying 'no comment'' to the charges, but Patton was convincing in his claim that the accused has said precisely nothing. Not even 'no comment'..

What he has said, or not said to his lawyer, or Barrister, who ever that is, is not known. And will not be known unless the Barrister decides to tell the press, and that scenario is highly unlikely, unless a firm denial and a claim of innocence is conveyed. Which has not been done,, as yet.

As far as is known , the only word that has been reported that the accused HAS said, was at his Magistrates hearing, early on, via ZOOM, and the magistrate in Ballarat asked Mr S. in his cell in Melbourne Remand, 'can you hear me, Mr. Stephenson?'.. and the accused replied, 'Yes'. and that, folks, is it. That's all he has said.

I'm convinced. I still think they might have talked to him early on before he was a suspect and got something worth disproving, but that wouldn't have been anything like my scenario where police accused him of being present at the death.

So did they hold off on the Elsworth investigation until after his arrest for fear of alerting him somehow?

 

[Trooper]

I'm convinced. I still think they might have talked to him early on before he was a suspect and got something worth disproving, but that wouldn't have been anything like my scenario where police accused him of being present at the death.

So did they hold off on the Elsworth investigation until after his arrest for fear of alerting him somehow?

I don't know if the police spoke to Stephenson before his arrest. What interested me the most was they had enough to move him rapidly up the line of person of interest, which I presume was what he started out as, up to only suspect of a hideous murder, and so damn quickly. It must have been, to my way of thinking, an enormous whack of copperplated evidence , the sort that goes straight to the DPP.

And this was before they were able to use the warrants to search his belongings, and property. And, I assume, seize stuff for evidence. What stuff, I long to know. Those things would have been among the stuff the detectives put to him during that 30 hours they held him on suspicion, then , since he said nothing, whatever they had did not need his input into their conclusions. The police did not need his confirmation of things, or agreement, or whatever, the charge of murder was what went down, without any word from him.


So they must have something incontrovertible. Anyways, that's how I see it.

 

[JLZ]

I don't know if the police spoke to Stephenson before his arrest. What interested me the most was they had enough to move him rapidly up the line of person of interest, which I presume was what he started out as, up to only suspect of a hideous murder, and so damn quickly. It must have been, to my way of thinking, an enormous whack of copperplated evidence , the sort that goes straight to the DPP.

Yes. They were convinced it was him very early. I don't go with you all the way thinking that because they're convinced they must have commensurate evidence.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

Ok, let's try and get something clear here regarding recording media, photos, video or audio.

Let's hypothesize a scenario where you saw someone stealing from a shop, and they were running away.

First of all, you would have to work out what was going on.
Then you might think, that person could have been stealing.
Then you might think, oh I wished I could have recorded that because it could have helped. However they've already bolted by at least 50 metres.

By the time you've got your finger on the red record button, it's all over.

In any scenario regarding SM, I can't imagine anyone had the time or cognizance to do this.

Imagine a car with mates or a girlfriend messing around on their way home from a wild night, filming crazy antics and sending Snapchats. Camera is already rolling..... MOO

Can anyone imagine what would/could possibly motivate a 22 year old to potentially kill an innocent woman in front of witnesses?

Surely such a deliberate attack, committed knowingly in front of witnesses, would be extraordinarily unlikely?

Unless PS may have been trying to prove something… to someone…?

I can certainly picture him trying to be impress or be in a position of power, a ringleader if you will. MOO

Hmmm....

I wonder if the trial will be held in Melbourne.

Ummm...
Some of you might become members of the Jury

Just saying...

Pretty sure we'd get ruled out for having too much interest/knowledge in the case.

It is possible it could be held in Melbourne, but it is not likely, in my opinion. Most likely , it will be held in Ballarat. For these reasons..

It is the community where the crime took place, it is where he comes from, and it is where his victim comes from. It is a Ballarat community matter , and, the accused is entitled to a jury of his peers, from his neighborhood, so to speak. Her family are entitled to a court near home, to lessen travel stress. His family, also, is entitled to the same consideration.

Ballarat is on the circuit of the Supreme Court, it is a regional city, it's not a little town, Supreme court cases have been held there before, it's not a new thing to Ballarat. In fact, Ballarat has a magnificent court house, from memory. I hope it has not been pulled down and some concrete ghastliness put up.

The problem lies in jury selection. However, juries are properly instructed and any difficulties winnowed out. And the selection pool would encompass the entire Shire of Ballarat, quite a large area. There would not be many of his peers available for jury duty, not many 22 yr old men put themselves down for jury duty, not many are ratepayers, at that age, so it would not be exactly 'of his peers'..

Any juror on that trial would already know they are up for jury duty this year, or early next year. Everyone is sent a letter, first to tell you that you are on the list, then to ask you if you can do it, or do you have commitments that make it difficult. This is sent way way early, so no one is wondering for long about jury duty.

I would think he would not be transported up the Ballarat and back to Melbourne every day. It would be done by video, but maybe that might be the way it goes, .. I would be surprised by that, though.

I'm not sure if it depends on the type of case but juries for Ballarat cases come from further afield that just Ballarat city or shire. I live about 45 minutes away and that's where we've been requested to attend for jury duty. We've never done it though, the only time I was selected I got out of it because I was pregnant. My son recently got a request but got out of it, I think because we're just over the 60km radius and that was a reason for getting out of it. My other son was all set to attend but it kept getting delayed and then cancelled. I'm not 100% sure of distances or details but I do know people in my area can be selected for jury duty in Ballarat.

Also, you don't put your name down for jury duty, you're randomly selected. Not sure whether names are chosen from registered voters or what, but you can and do get random letters requesting your attendance. They are sent out several months in advance, about 3-4 from memory. I highly doubt juries are being chosen now for cases in 2025.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes. They were convinced it was him very early. I don't go with you all the way thinking that because they're convinced they must have commensurate evidence.

At times, I have wondered if the accused was a big flight risk ... so the police had to swoop in quickly and arrest him.
Then get the warrants for all of the searches.

If they had been surreptitiously watching and listening to him for a couple of weeks, they might have heard something that pushed their need to arrest him quickly.

imo

 

[Cliff Hardy]

I live about 45 minutes away and that's where we've been requested to attend for jury duty. We've never done it though, the only time I was selected I got out of it because I was pregnant. My son recently got a request but got out of it, I think because we're just over the 60km radius and that was a reason for getting out of it.

I live in Melbourne and have been called up twice for jury duty. The first time was many years ago and I sat in the holding pen for 3 days before being dismissed. Second time round, I sat there for 2 days and on day 3 I had just starting thinking I would be headed home shortly when they called out my name. Served on a case that lasted 13 working days and if I remember correctly, they later informed me I wouldn't get another call up. Pity, because it is a very interesting experience.