GUILTY Australia - JS, 32 y.o. man, charged w/ murder of 9 y.o. girl , Mt Wilson, 13 January 2022 #3

[SouthAussie]

I think Justin might have a fair defence of mental incompetence.

I don't. Because he was being medically treated for both schizophrenia and a heroin addiction.
Once a person is being treated with heavy-duty drugs, the "voices" should not appear. The heroin twitches and cramps should fade.

As Charlise had his meds in her system, it can be presumed that he had his meds with him and was taking them.

Sure, it could be argued that he didn't take his meds. But I think it might be a hard slog to credibly maintain that argument.

imo

 

[katydid23]

I don't think his schizophrenia was to blame. I think he was a sexual predator, a sexual deviant, and that probably the use of meth helped trigger that horrible outcome. JMO

 

[JLZ]

I don't. Because he was being medically treated for both schizophrenia and a heroin addiction.
Once a person is being treated with heavy-duty drugs, the "voices" should not appear. The heroin twitches and cramps should fade.

As Charlise had his meds in her system, it can be presumed that he had his meds with him and was taking them.

Sure, it could be argued that he didn't take his meds. But I think it might be a hard slog to credibly maintain that argument.

imo

Well, he has the medical condition. How it was affecting him at the time of the crime, and how it affected him afterwards telling people what happened, how it affects him now, they are matters for expert evidence. Medication isn't magic and it affects different people differently; combining medications complicates the question. Just from observation he has a poor grasp on reality. He's delusional, with or without hallucinations.

 

[SouthAussie]

Well, he has the medical condition. How it was affecting him at the time of the crime, and how it affected him afterwards telling people what happened, how it affects him now, they are matters for expert evidence. Medication isn't magic and it affects different people differently; combining medications complicates the question. Just from observation he has a poor grasp on reality. He's delusional, with or without hallucinations.

Yes, the experts would testify about the effects of the medications.

Stein evidently realises he cannot claim mental incompetence, otherwise it would have been his best defence.

imo

ETA: And he knows they found that he had been viewing sexual child images. How long had he been doing that?

 

[JLZ]

Yes, the experts would testify about the effects of the medications.

Stein evidently realises he cannot claim mental incompetence, otherwise it would have been his best defence.

imo

BBM. I don't think it can be assumed that he realises very much. By this time he may really think K is guilty and he's the sanest man who's ever lived. His constant lies, while leaving evidence all about--the texts/voicemails for example--how do I say this, it's like his perceptions and beliefs have a very short time horizon, and the present is everything. It's the cunning of an animal that can see forty minutes ahead, and remember a little bit more.

 

[SouthAussie]

BBM. I don't think it can be assumed that he realises very much. By this time he may really think K is guilty and he's the sanest man who's ever lived. His constant lies, while leaving evidence all about--the texts/voicemails for example--how do I say this, it's like his perceptions and beliefs have a very short time horizon, and the present is everything. It's the cunning of an animal that can see forty minutes ahead, and remember a little bit more.

I think it is more likely that he didn't plan to kill Charlise. So his coverup was very sloppy.
I think he probably thought that drugging Charlise would make her not remember what happened to her. And that he perhaps damaged her body, so it would be realised what he did to her.

So he strategically shot Charlise, and then set about his sloppy coverup.

imo

 

[JLZ]

I think it is more likely that he didn't plan to kill Charlise. So his coverup was very sloppy.
I think he probably thought that drugging Charlise would make her not remember what happened to her. And that he perhaps damaged her body, so it would be realised what he did to her.

So he strategically shot Charlise, and then set about his sloppy coverup.

imo

Yes, I think he had a strategy. Perhaps I don't appreciate how stupid stupid can be while within coo-ee of normal.

 

[katydid23]

Yes, I think he had a strategy. Perhaps I don't appreciate how stupid stupid can be while within coo-ee of normal.

Yes, I think many of these predators fly by the seat of their pants. They have this intense urge, so they give in to it. Then they are left with impossible circumstances to navigate through and they just bulldoze their way through, lying and scheming.

He was very inventive and productive and tried many various options---biggest problem was adding the heavy sand before he moved the barrel out of the ute. Thank goodness or he may have been able to drop it into the lake, out of sight.

 

[caradana]

I think we’re parsing, as good people who want there to be justice and meaning and rationality in this world, the mostly irrelevant and limited thought process of a MOO: schizophrenic. There is no reasoning through this. If I’m a juror it’s mostly random and hopeless and awful and essentially untreatable. And here we are. I’d write “here we are in 2024” but the criminality of mentally ill has been a major thing since well before Bethlehem. There is no new news here, sadly.

 

[JLZ]

I think we’re parsing, as good people who want there to be justice and meaning and rationality in this world, the mostly irrelevant and limited thought process of a MOO: schizophrenic. There is no reasoning through this. If I’m a juror it’s mostly random and hopeless and awful and essentially untreatable. And here we are. I’d write “here we are in 2024” but the criminality of mentally ill has been a major thing since well before Bethlehem. There is no new news here, sadly.

There's a lot of people here with mental health conditions requiring treatment, even schizophrenics perhaps (I've known a few) who aren't at all criminal. On the other hand, the criminality of the mentally well, or mentally untreated, has been a major thing since . . . before my time.

 

[JBowie]

Leonie Ryan from Channel 7 News, who informed me that the journalists are all able to dial into the trial rather than having to go to court face to face.

Thanks for that. I had suspected as much and I would not be surprised if they were multitasking at the time too, going by the paltry amount of -- at times quite sloppy -- reportage we have been getting from them.

IMO, trials such as this should be streamed to YouTube, so that we can listen to everything that is said rather than having to rely on MSM reporters and their editors who decide how much is reported, and when.

 

[JBowie]

I wonder how his mother will react

I'm leery of the mother. There are times when, IMO, she might have been close to being an accessory after the fact. I frankly don't believe her testimony that she heard a young voice in the background of her phone conversation with JS calling out "Narelle".

 

[JBowie]

The jury set to decide whether Justin Stein shot and killed schoolgirl Charlise Mutten has been told the alleged killer “manipulated” his stories, which have been described as “nonsense”.

After more than 40 witnesses, Mr Stein’s murder trial in the NSW Supreme Court has entered its final stages.

Crown prosecutor Ken McKay SC delivered his closing argument on Wednesday, where he urged the jury to find Mr Stein had murdered Charlise by 10.06am on January 12, 2022.

“Charlise Mutten was dead, on the Crown case, at that time at 10.06am,” Mr McKay said.

“Shot twice by the accused.”

Prosecutors allege Mr Stein was the “last person” to see Charlise and had the opportunity to kill her between 7.16pm on January 11 and 10.06am on January 12.

Mr McKay told the jury Mr Stein had made up stories to Ms Mutten about the whereabouts of her daughter, that she was in the care of a woman who had attended the property on the morning of January 12.

The prosecutor told the court Mr Stein’s version of events was “nonsense” and “it just did not happen that way”.

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/trial-in-schoolgirl-murder-trial-of-justin-stein-enters-final-stages/news-story/2490b2175afaffd94e4129b18e7ceded

 

[Marg944]

Thanks for that. I had suspected as much and I would not be surprised if they were multitasking at the time too, going by the paltry amount of -- at times quite sloppy -- reportage we have been getting from them.

IMO, trials such as this should be streamed to YouTube, so that we can listen to everything that is said rather than having to rely on MSM reporters and their editors who decide how much is reported, and when.

100% agree with you JBowie. We certainly should be able to watch important trials online. Especially ones that have captured so much public interest.

So much information heard at court has not been reported on by the media. When I was at court yesterday I was told that 2 of Annemie Stein’s work colleagues were called as witnesses, yet there has been nothing in the media about that. Also, I have not seen anything in the media to say that there are no more witnesses to be called…. but I had written that on here. Also about Kallista’s smashed mobile…. That could be a major point in that is why she couldn’t be tracked…. But that hasn’t been reported by the media.

Edit: Removed a topic that was discussed in court without the jury present….thanks to Dr Sleuth for pointing that out to me.

IMHO

 

[Marg944]

So either no sexual assault occurred, or there was no proof remaining?

IMHO

 

[drsleuth]

100% agree with you JBowie. We certainly should be able to watch important trials online. Especially ones that have captured so much public interest.

So much information heard at court has not been reported on by the media. When I was at court yesterday I was told that 2 of Annemie Stein’s work colleagues were called as witnesses, yet there has been nothing in the media about that. Also, I have not seen anything in the media to say that there are no more witnesses to be called…. but I had written that on here. Also about Kallista’s smashed mobile…. That could be a major point in that is why she couldn’t be tracked…. But that hasn’t been reported by the media. I also don’t think I have seen the media report on the Judge asking about Stein claiming mental impairment….

IMHO

BBM: Was that in front of the jury? I don't think the media can report on stuff mentioned outside of the jury.

It's certainly worth making the effort, if you can , to go to court & hear the evidence yourself.

 

[SouthAussie]

So either no sexual assault occurred, or there was no proof remaining?

IMHO

Probably no proof remaining.

They are saying he killed Charlise because he drugged her.
She also had no undies on when she was found. She was in his bedroom. She was shot in the lower back. She was shot in the face.

It is likely up to the jury to join the dots. Why were all of those scenarios present? Who had a reason for those things? Likely not her mum.

imo

 

[Marg944]

BBM: Was that in front of the jury? I don't think the media can report on stuff mentioned outside of the jury.

It's certainly worth making the effort, if you can , to go to court & hear the evidence yourself.

The jury had been dismissed for the day. I didn’t realise that is the case, so thank you for pointing that out to me. It seems “reporting anything in the absence of a jury” is not allowed, I have now removed that bit.

 

[drsleuth]

The jury had been dismissed for the day. I didn’t realise that is the case, so thank you for pointing that out to me. It seems “reporting anything in the absence of a jury” is not allowed, I have now removed that bit.

Yep it can be a bit tricky at times.

My general rule of thumb is, if the MSM is not reporting on something important , than there must be a reason why.

There was quite a bit from the WT inquest that I could not report back here.

 

[Marg944]

Yep it can be a bit tricky at times.

My general rule of thumb is, if the MSM is not reporting on something important , than there must be a reason why.

There was quite a bit from the WT inquest that I could not report back here.

Yes, I did show restraint today. I attended court for WT foster parents mention, and didn’t disclose the next date set down for mention…. just in case it was suppressed. But, since then, MSM have printed it…. I live and learn.