GUILTY Australia - Jill Meagher, 29, Melbourne, 22 Sep 2012 #1

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
IHAVENOCLUE said:
Now I can't wait to see if anyone (not in WS)googles wallet vs. purse vs. handbag... and they need a drink after reading through all these definitions!

:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:
Click to expand...

Don't forget the pocket books and billfolds!
 
SapphireSteel said:
Ok now they are saying they are not sure where she was when she made the final call to her brother.

An Irish woman phoned her brother shortly before she vanished but police now aren't sure if she made the call from inside a Melbourne bar or as she made the late-night walk home.
[I]"She just went `I'm worried, I'm worried' and that really was the last bit of (contact)," Mrs McKeon said.
Ms Meagher then hung up, and Michael's repeated efforts to call her back failed, Mrs McKeon said.[/I]

I don't like that "I'm worried" bit. The police are stating she was worried about her father, but her father is alive and well (even if he has recently had a stroke) and 2am seems a very odd time to be so worried about his health.

There's more to this story than meets the eye. As usual.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8537433/abc-radio-employee-missing-in-melbourne

:dunno:
Click to expand...
the link I posted upstream quotes law enforcement warning against rumors about that phone call.. but here it is again:

Detective Inspector Potter later warned against rumours appearing on social media about a phone call to Ms Meagher's brother.
"I think there's been a bit of confusion over that phone call, we've spoken to the brother certainly and the subject of their discussion was over the health of their father, who I understand is in poor health," says Inspector Potter.
Click to expand...
http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012/09/24/3596295.htm
 
nursebeeme said:
at this point they are not saying what exactly was hers only that some of the contents were hers.
Click to expand...

often police will say "some things have been identified" after they have spoken to a relative, in this case probably the husband, who could say "yes this is hers" or "I am not sure, I can't remember seeing that item before" - the police can't say it is certainly hers until someone can positively identify it as being hers.

there isn't a person in the world that could identify everything i carry in my handbag LOL
 
I said in Australia that a purse is a handbag, but a wallet is what you carry your money in.

Everywhere else around the world apparently, a purse=wallet.

In Australia a purse=handbag.
Click to expand...

As a mere male, I have NEVER heard my wife use those terms. The thing with her money and credit cards in is usually her purse - occasionally wallet.

The thing with the purse in it, as well as her phone, make-up, and all the other stuff she carries is her handbag - occasionally just her 'bag'.

Calling a handbag a purse is the American way - I know we're absorbing more of it all the time, but not this one I'd suggest. I also have Gen Y nieces, and they use the same terms as my wife does.

And just on the point of Bankcards (and other credit cards generally) being wiped by magnets - most nowadays are NOT. They incorporate a chip, rather than a magnetic stripe. Some have both. Australia was fairly late to the party for so-called "Chip & PIN" cards, but most of the older mag stripe cards have been replaced with chipped cards over the last couple of years.

It's a hair-splitting point, I know, but relevant if you're suggesting that she would not carry her credit card loose in a handbag due to magnetic interference with it.

My wife goes out to dinner with workmates quite frequently, and she takes her handbag, containing her phone and a credit card and some tissues. That's it. She leaves her purse at home, with all the other credit cards, loyalty cards, drivers's licence, etc.

So when Jill's husband said she didn't take her purse with her, I would assume he meant she did exactly what my wife does. Left the purse lying on the kitchen table or somewhere, but knowing she was OK for money because she had her credit card - in her handbag.

The interesting tidbit that the police now think the bag may have been planted later is quite perplexing, really. What on earth would an abductor hope to gain by that, apart from the obvious thing of trying to put the police off the scent by suggesting place and direction which is deliberately misleading? That just doesn't make sense to me - if I had possession of some incriminating evidence, the LAST place I'd put it would be right in the middle of the intensive search area.
 
nursebeeme said:
picture of the handbag
http://images.theage.com.au/2012/09/25/3662444/ds_meagher25a_20120925065909440203-600x400.jpg

from this link:
http://www.theage.com.au/photogalle...d-to-jill-20120924-26gi2.html?selectedImage=0

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/f...-other-incidents-reported-20120924-26gku.html
Click to expand...

the slideshow at the above link that has the picture of the purse and where it was found has some other pictures of the surrounding area/alley way near where it was found
 
snips of the highlights

Inspector Potter has told ABC 774 Melbourne that the focus of their investigations today will be sifting through information provided to Crime Stoppers, and interaction from members of the public on the Facebook page set up to help find Ms Meagher.
Click to expand...

Victorian Police Chief Commissioner Ken Lay has rejected suggestions the investigation was slow to get underway, including claims that Ms Meagher's bank accounts and phone records were not checked initially.

"I've spoken to the head of the homicide squad this morning who advised me those initial checks were actually done on the weekend," he told ABC 774 Melbourne's Jon Faine.

"I'm more than satisfied that our members treated it seriously; there was a good response on the Saturday and there was a good response on the Sunday and we've put the resources to try and resolve this - this is a difficult, difficult case."

He conceded that police strategy can sometimes include withholding information, "to try to understand whether in fact the person is missing by choice or missing by misadventure", but said he was not sure that was the case with the Meagher investigation.
Click to expand...

"We also understand that her brother could hear voices in the background, other men and different other voices.

"We're speculating, of course, but it is a possibility she was still at Bar Etiquette at that time and that the conversations in the background were, in fact, other patrons."
Click to expand...

Ms Meagher's brother Michael has flown to Melbourne to support Mr Meagher during the search.
Click to expand...

much more at link


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-25/meagher-facebook-reports/4278772
 
nursebeeme said:
the slideshow at the above link that has the picture of the purse and where it was found has some other pictures of the surrounding area/alley way near where it was found
Click to expand...

Okay if there is a picture of the item, maybe the debate can cease about what it should have been called...
 
DrWatson said:
As a mere male, I have NEVER heard my wife use those terms. The thing with her money and credit cards in is usually her purse - occasionally wallet.

The thing with the purse in it, as well as her phone, make-up, and all the other stuff she carries is her handbag - occasionally just her 'bag'.

Calling a handbag a purse is the American way - I know we're absorbing more of it all the time, but not this one I'd suggest. I also have Gen Y nieces, and they use the same terms as my wife does.

And just on the point of Bankcards (and other credit cards generally) being wiped by magnets - most nowadays are NOT. They incorporate a chip, rather than a magnetic stripe. Some have both. Australia was fairly late to the party for so-called "Chip & PIN" cards, but most of the older mag stripe cards have been replaced with chipped cards over the last couple of years.

It's a hair-splitting point, I know, but relevant if you're suggesting that she would not carry her credit card loose in a handbag due to magnetic interference with it.

My wife goes out to dinner with workmates quite frequently, and she takes her handbag, containing her phone and a credit card and some tissues. That's it. She leaves her purse at home, with all the other credit cards, loyalty cards, drivers's licence, etc.

So when Jill's husband said she didn't take her purse with her, I would assume he meant she did exactly what my wife does. Left the purse lying on the kitchen table or somewhere, but knowing she was OK for money because she had her credit card - in her handbag.

The interesting tidbit that the police now think the bag may have been planted later is quite perplexing, really. What on earth would an abductor hope to gain by that, apart from the obvious thing of trying to put the police off the scent by suggesting place and direction which is deliberately misleading? That just doesn't make sense to me - if I had possession of some incriminating evidence, the LAST place I'd put it would be right in the middle of the intensive search area.
Click to expand...

Yay! I didn't know they'd FINALLY replaced the magnetic strip...as you say it is only within the last couple of years so I would wager most women wouldn't know and would still be erring on the side of caution. We've all made the mistake :(

Also, you are a man. No insult intended but we were discussing a man's use of the word "purse". My ex husband called a "dress" a "skirt" and vice versa, but he grew up in a home without any females.

As I keep saying, go to ebay australia and search for womens purses.

You will get handbags. Handbags and purses mean the same here.

I believe her husband meant she left home without her handbag - yet it turned up.

As far as the staging...I'm with you...:what:???

Clearly the police didn't "just miss it" the first time around, clearly it was placed after the initial search.

What would the motive be?

To imply she was taken at a different location?

To fit with a "story"?

To imply a local is involved? As this would require a trip BACK to the site, I would imagine a local actually IS involved, anyway.

Who goes off to work without their handbag? Not me. A woman's handbag is her life. If you go to work you are gone for an extended period and may unexpectedly need pain relief, tissues, lipstick, hairspray, a brush, moisturiser, your diary, an umbrella (especially in Melbourne). Even if I go out the door and think "I won't need my bag" I usually take it anyway because experience has proven me wrong too many times.

I simply cannot see her going to work and then on to drinks after, with just her phone and a bankcard. A woman like Jill owns several handbags, they are accessories, she enjoys them and probably spends quite a bit of money on buying nice ones.

All opinion only of course. She may have used an old kmart bag for all I know.
 
cluciano63 said:
Okay if there is a picture of the item, maybe the debate can cease about what it should have been called...
Click to expand...

If only it were that easy.

Her husband told reporters she left home without her "purse".

He's Irish.

That's as far as we've got.

:banghead:
 
"There's two options; the original search found nothing and then on Monday the bag was found by a local resident.

"You've got to ask which is true

He said the bag was found in a "clearly visible" spot on the ground off Hope St.

"We've got to look at the possibility of the bag being placed there late on Sunday or early Monday morning," he said.

He said the bag's contents had been untouched, except for Ms Meagher's mobile phone which was missing.
"Her cards and the other contents were still inside.

He said questions raised surrounding the discovery of the bag had prompted investigators to reexamine whether Ms Meagher had even left Sydney Rd the night she disappeared.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...tes-in-brunswick/story-e6freuy9-1226479708333
 
Interesting. These things seem to stand out in this case:

* It is doubtful if the handbag was found on the seat it would not have been discovered until Monday. So the question is who put it there and why. Any person involved in criminal activities would not plant evidence at a later date
* While the husband is absolutely innocent until proven otherwise, why would he begin calling her non-stop from 2 am (the exact time she went missing) until 6 am? She would have had to have sent him a message that she was on her way
* The husband claims to have searched for her for four hours. Considering the distance from the bar and the home is a 10-minute walk, where did he actually search?
* Unless there is a police report of the attempted abductions, the claims of women being followed in that area are baseless. Why would someone on Facebook claim to have been so shaken up she left the area and not filed a report? Police surely would have circulated warnings if this was the case
 
nursebeeme said:
picture of the handbag
http://images.theage.com.au/2012/09/25/3662444/ds_meagher25a_20120925065909440203-600x400.jpg

from this link:
http://www.theage.com.au/photogalle...d-to-jill-20120924-26gi2.html?selectedImage=0

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/f...-other-incidents-reported-20120924-26gku.html
Click to expand...

Up thread it was stated that the handbag (the term used by police) was found on the ground in the laneway. The handbag in the picture appears to be sitting on top of something other than the ground, like a stool, table or chair. Did the police move it prior to this photo? I would think it would be more visible sitting where it is, as opposed to on the ground between a vehicle and wall, as I had pictured it being earlier.
 
snipped:
bezerkos said:
Interesting. These things seem to stand out in this case:

* It is doubtful if the handbag was found on the seat it would not have been discovered until Monday. So the question is who put it there and why. Any person involved in criminal activities would not plant evidence at a later date
* While the husband is absolutely innocent until proven otherwise, why would he begin calling her non-stop from 2 am (the exact time she went missing) until 6 am? She would have had to have sent him a message that she was on her way
* The husband claims to have searched for her for four hours. Considering the distance from the bar and the home is a 10-minute walk, where did he actually search?
Click to expand...

I can't see where it says it was found on a seat, from memory the handbag was found next to a car in the alley.

Hubby (being a local) would know that the bar closed at 1am and that she should be home by 2am. He had also received a text message from her which he didn't read until 1am when he woke from a sleep. makes sense to me that it was useless responding to a text that asked him to join her when he knew the bar was now closed. IMO he may have woken up, been groggy, decided to wait up for her and then realized she should be home and started the calls to her at 2am. He knew where she was so she should have answered.

As to where he searched - I have no idea.

The husband is a victim at this stage but I fail to see how he could have been involved given that she was speaking to her brother at 1:45 am (verifiable) - her brother called back and she didn't answer (this is when she may have been in trouble - possible trying to stop what was happening - he did call straight back) - 15 mins later the husband starts calling non - stop (verifiable again) - I am not sure how anyone makes calls while supposedly arguing/ fighting/harming his wife. The window frame time-wise is just to small for him to be involved I think. All moo
 
bezerkos said:
Interesting. These things seem to stand out in this case:

* It is doubtful if the handbag was found on the seat it would not have been discovered until Monday. So the question is who put it there and why. Any person involved in criminal activities would not plant evidence at a later date
* While the husband is absolutely innocent until proven otherwise, why would he begin calling her non-stop from 2 am (the exact time she went missing) until 6 am? She would have had to have sent him a message that she was on her way
* The husband claims to have searched for her for four hours. Considering the distance from the bar and the home is a 10-minute walk, where did he actually search?
* Unless there is a police report of the attempted abductions, the claims of women being followed in that area are baseless. Why would someone on Facebook claim to have been so shaken up she left the area and not filed a report? Police surely would have circulated warnings if this was the case
Click to expand...

the bag (to me looks like a small ladies backpack possibly) was found on the ground near the drivers side door of a car. The pictures of it on a seat have the passenger side nearest, so it's been moved.

her husband called non stop 2am to 6am, but got the text message to join her at 1am, did he text a reply or call her then? if not why not.

Lots of women don't report things, fear of not being believed, fear of being blamed for what they wore, where they were, what they were doing, not wanting to relive trauma etc. As an example approximately only a quarter of all rapes are reported.
 
hollye said:
Up thread it was stated that the handbag (the term used by police) was found on the ground in the laneway. The handbag in the picture appears to be sitting on top of something other than the ground, like a stool, table or chair. Did the police move it prior to this photo? I would think it would be more visible sitting where it is, as opposed to on the ground between a vehicle and wall, as I had pictured it being earlier.
Click to expand...

The "finder" may have moved it so it didn't get run over?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 107 more.
Total: 1,556 (members: 108, guests: 1,448)

Online statistics

Members online
108
Guests online
1,448
Total visitors
1,556
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,579
Messages
18,097,032
Members
230,886
Latest member
DeeDee214
Back
Top