GUILTY Australia - Jill Meagher, 29, Melbourne, 22 Sep 2012 #4

[summer_breeze]

The fuss over social media is, perhaps, understandable. Some of the comments on those sites are just.....<modsnip's self>. But, perhaps, all the fuss is just fueling a potential defense by calling such pronounced attention to the sites.

What about the tens of thousands who showed up to march because of this heinous crime? Right in Melbourne itself. (And kudos for doing so!!!! The march and turnout were simply awesome! As was the message. Please don't read this as my criticizing the march in anyway!! This is not my intent. )

Surely there is a mental imprint on all those folks' minds that is not going away anytime soon. Not to mention all who watched or read about it in main stream media. To me, this would cause just as much concern regarding the ability to carry on a fair trial in Melbourne, if not the whole of Victoria.

I understand that Facebook is in "print", lasting forever. And can reach many more people. But so are those mental imprints, and the opinions that they have generated in each of us across the globe. (Think about the CCTV footage) And perhaps all these medium are not so concentrated to the population of Melbourne, Victoria, as was the march.

To me, this man stands no chance of a "fair trial" in Melbourne or Victoria any which way you look at it, if we must equate fairness to what potential jurors may possibly think, have heard or read when they are selected for the jury, and then presume those jurors are not able to put this aside during a trial in the face of the evidence presented.

We have seen the opposite happen in the US. (Caylee Anthony, for example. We might not appreciate the outcome of that trial in any way....but....that is a topic for another thread)

I hold out every hope that AB pleads guilty!

All in my humble opinion only.

 

[LeoBear]

The fuss over social media is, perhaps, understandable. Some of the comments on those sites are just.....<modsnip's self>. But, perhaps, all the fuss is just fueling a potential defense by calling such pronounced attention to the sites.

What about the tens of thousands who showed up to march because of this heinous crime? Right in Melbourne itself. (And kudos for doing so!!!! The march and turnout were simply awesome! As was the message. Please don't read this as my criticizing the march in anyway!! This is not my intent. )

Surely there is a mental imprint on all those folks' minds that is not going away anytime soon. Not to mention all who watched or read about it in main stream media. To me, this would cause just as much concern regarding the ability to carry on a fair trial in Melbourne, if not the whole of Victoria.

I understand that Facebook is in "print", lasting forever. And can reach many more people. But so are those mental imprints, and the opinions that they have generated in each of us across the globe. (Think about the CCTV footage) And perhaps all these medium are not so concentrated to the population of Melbourne, Victoria, as was the march.

To me, this man stands no chance of a "fair trial" in Melbourne or Victoria any which way you look at it, if we must equate fairness to what potential jurors may possibly think, have heard or read when they are selected for the jury, and then presume those jurors are not able to put this aside during a trial in the face of the evidence presented.

We have seen the opposite happen in the US. (Caylee Anthony, for example. We might not appreciate the outcome of that trial in any way....but....that is a topic for another thread)

I hold out every hope that AB pleads guilty!

All in my humble opinion only.

Agree! I think that it was the wide dissemination of the CCTV tape and the subsequent footage of the suspect's arrest that has meant that few people in Melbourne & possibly Australia don't associate him - his name, face, blue hoody with the crime. The subsequent discussions of him on social media do not change this. Vic Police conceded that they would not normally have arrested the suspect so quickly but needed to act because they were concerned about repeat offence(s). In view of this along with the suspect showing the cops where the body is, it is difficult to come up with a scenario where someone else committed the crime.

I'm guessing you can't print any of this. I guess my point is that social media was of a second order issue in terms of determining whether this fellow can get a fair trial or not

 

[Berry]

The response by the public, hopefully shows now and in the future at election time, how appalled we all are at this crime and all sex crimes. We have long memories when voting and MPs should be reading the need for change in parole and sentencing at this stage of incarceration IMO.

 

[GutFeeling!]

This whole social media slam is kind of futile when it comes to Jury selection in Australia in any case. We don't question jurors like it is done in the US. They actually select the jurors from a bag of numbers after the selection process off an election roll (you are automatically registered to vote at age 18 in Australia - it is not listed on your divers license or whatever it is state side.

They want a cross - section of the community - well folks, it's 2012 and no matter what the cross section is going to have people that are very active on social media sites because those people are a major part of the community.

Unless they want to introduce jury selection American style (and I would hate that) then they are still going to get people with social media knowledge.

There was a time when people didn't have television - when we all went to TV did that change things in the jury pool because the audience grew then too.

Much to do about nothing, it's just a topic that needs to be discussed.

 

[LegallyBrunette]

The response by the public, hopefully shows now and in the future at election time, how appalled we all are at this crime and all sex crimes. We have long memories when voting and MPs should be reading the need for change in parole and sentencing at this stage of incarceration IMO.

Can only hope that all those who marched on Sunday will remember when next they go to the ballot box. Laws are already in place that provide for appropriate sentences but the judge must apply them. Judges are appointed by the Parliament. More lenient, left-leaning judiciary are appointed by like-minded governments - if you get my drift. NSW is infested with them.

 

[nursebeeme]

I think social media is a huge problem and it does need to be addressed. In the Jason Young trial there was an allegation that a juror was tweeting to someone during breaks (or posting about the deliberations/what vote count they were at)... it caused a huge inquest and investigation... tons of money spent and also endangers the appeal process. (it has been unfounded currently re: that particular inquest)

I **think** since that happened there has been a law put on the books about cell phones in the courtroom.... but will have to look around.

Either way social media is a danger in many different ways, shapes, and forms to the judicial process.

:twocents:

 

[GutFeeling!]

I want to know who would think it's a good idea to offer darts as a sport for prisoners! Unless they have some kind of foam or plastic darts?

Don't forget that the offers to inmates are not automatic, they are a reward system, so a game of darts will not be given to certain people. None of those things are a given to any prisoner - it is just a list of what they "may" be able to do.

 

[Makara]

I want to know who would think it's a good idea to offer darts as a sport for prisoners! Unless they have some kind of foam or plastic darts?

They're probably magnetic darts and dartboard. Lots of fun BTW. :blushing:

 

[GutFeeling!]

The response by the public, hopefully shows now and in the future at election time, how appalled we all are at this crime and all sex crimes. We have long memories when voting and MPs should be reading the need for change in parole and sentencing at this stage of incarceration IMO.

I am not defending the parole board in any way but the other thing that must be taken into account before we all jump up and down about this one case is how many times have they got it right? We do hear of too many re-offenders as far as I am concerned but to judge fairly I would want to see how many people were released on parole, I'd want to know everything about their original crimes and if they did end up re-offending. Then look at the offense they have committed while on parole - is it an escalation of previous offenses or is it something totally unrelated eg where they jailed originally for rape and is their latest offense car theft (unrelated to original crime)

We are upset and hurt because of this particular case - part of that imo is that we saw Jill literally minutes before she disappeared, we witnessed it, we watched someone walking home and stopping to talk to someone - that makes this all very personal. When the CCTV footage was first released and I watched it knowing she was still missing my heart sank, I teared up - it really hurt, and I know I am not alone on that.

 

[LegallyBrunette]

I am not defending the parole board in any way but the other thing that must be taken into account before we all jump up and down about this one case is how many times have they got it right? We do hear of too many re-offenders as far as I am concerned but to judge fairly I would want to see how many people were released on parole, I'd want to know everything about their original crimes and if they did end up re-offending. Then look at the offense they have committed while on parole - is it an escalation of previous offenses or is it something totally unrelated eg where they jailed originally for rape and is their latest offense car theft (unrelated to original crime)

We are upset and hurt because of this particular case - part of that imo is that we saw Jill literally minutes before she disappeared, we witnessed it, we watched someone walking home and stopping to talk to someone - that makes this all very personal. When the CCTV footage was first released and I watched it knowing she was still missing my heart sank, I teared up - it really hurt, and I know I am not alone on that.

Sunday, 19 June 2011 6:00am - SA Police News

40% of prisoners released on parole re-offend
SAPOL acknowledges the considerable community concern regarding the large number of released prisoners who re-offend while on parole.

SAPOL has examined its records to determine how many parolees are re-offending.

The following statistics take into account prisoners released from custody and placed on parole from 1 January 2010 to 31 March 2010.

During this period 161 prisoners were released on parole.

•65 of 161 offended while on parole (40%)
•136 prisoners were 'automatically released' on parole – of these 52 offended while on parole (38%)
•25 prisoners were released following Parole Board hearings – of these 13 offended while on parole (52%)
•56 prisoners breached their parole conditions (34%), 20 of these involved the detection of illicit drug use as a result of urinalysis testing*

http://www.sapolicenews.com.au/fact...f-prisoners-released-on-parole-re-offend.html

 

[LegallyBrunette]

Prepare to be angry..
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/ipad/crime-wave-fanned-by-flawed-system/story-fn6bn88w-1226123591266 20 August 2011

VICTORIANS are, in the main, cynical when it comes to senior police and politicians telling them our streets are safe and we should not fall prey to "perceptions" about crime.
..Today, the Sunday Herald Sun shows why the spin that routinely comes out of Police Command and politicians, most notably from members of the former Brumby government, cannot be believed.

Crime statistics released under Freedom of Information laws - obtained after a six-month tussle with Police Command - reveal a startling truth about the state's justice system.

Not only is it broken, but it is so dysfunctional that it is leaving Victorians to be murdered, raped, robbed and bashed.

According to the official data, last year 884 offenders arrested were later bailed by police or the courts and went on to commit 4117 new offences before being re-arrested.

Offences committed during this second-chance crime wave included one murder, five rapes, 18 armed robberies, 70 drug deals, 311 assaults and 338 burglaries.

The inescapable fact is that the victims of these crimes -- most notably the person murdered and those raped -- should not have been left to become victims.

This is not the first example of our justice system failing Victorians by freeing criminals and giving them the chance to re-offend. On April 19, Herald Sun crime reporter Geoff Wilkinson revealed seven parole violators charged with murder were still on the streets at the time of the killing because of a failure in the Victoria Police computer system. As Wilkinson reported, the murders could have been prevented if police who dealt with the offenders over other matters had known they were on parole.

 

[LegallyBrunette]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/vi...-last-seen-alive/story-e6frf7kx-1226486124892

THE grieving husband of Jill Meagher has walked the path where his wife was last seen alive.
Comforted by family and friends, Tom Meagher thanked Patricia Liapis, owner of Duchess Boutique, which has become a makeshift memorial site at which mourners have placed thousands of flowers.
A private funeral service for immediate family and friends will be held for Ms Meagher in Melbourne this week.
Another service is to be held in her home town of Drogheda, Ireland, on Friday.
Mr Meagher said he was coping as he solemnly walked along Sydney Rd just before 4pm.
<modsnip>

 

[summer_breeze]

Please be advised, that due to US copyright law and WS rules, we are only allowed to copy/paste 10% of any MSM article.

Please adjust your own posts accordingly.

 

[catswhiskers]

An article below answering some of the questions we were asking regarding how JMs phone assisted police in their initial investigations:


http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/the-long-arm-of-modern-technology-20120929-26skq.html

 

[Salem]

This whole social media slam is kind of futile when it comes to Jury selection in Australia in any case. We don't question jurors like it is done in the US. They actually select the jurors from a bag of numbers after the selection process off an election roll (you are automatically registered to vote at age 18 in Australia - it is not listed on your divers license or whatever it is state side.

They want a cross - section of the community - well folks, it's 2012 and no matter what the cross section is going to have people that are very active on social media sites because those people are a major part of the community.

Unless they want to introduce jury selection American style (and I would hate that) then they are still going to get people with social media knowledge.

There was a time when people didn't have television - when we all went to TV did that change things in the jury pool because the audience grew then too.

Much to do about nothing, it's just a topic that needs to be discussed.

O/T - Well, in Victoria, it seems TV did change things, right? Isn't your TV censored in Victoria? You can't get certain programs or news? It seems the lawmakers, at least in the Victoria area, censor a lot of info. Which makes it understandable that citizens would turn to the internet.

Sorry to be off topic, just interesting the differences between this Victoria portion of Austrailia and the rest of the country.

Salem

 

[Paulie11]

food for thought:

It is possible that blue hoodie took off after Jill was dismissing him at Duchess Boutique, ran to his car- parked there on Sydney road- so that Jill could see him get into his car and then drive off up Sydney road (north). Jill thought she was safe and the danger was gone. Then, maybe he turned into a side street left, came back down to Hope Street from the back route, and surprised her, jumped out and assaulted her.

Or he got into his car, drove south toward the city, then right onto Victoria street, and right again onto Percy St.- then found her somewhere on her way home in the dark side-streets/alleys and hit her and kidnapped her and promptly drove off.

Going back down south along Sydney road would have totally disarmed her because her mentality was to go north, and little did she think that he could do a right (victoria) and right (percy) and be right back to near where she was. She wouldn&#8217;t have suspected this as she&#8217;d be thinking he was gone- it&#8217;s just psychological short-sightedness that we all get from moment to moment. She would have been consumed with dealing with the immediate and present danger of his being right there; but as soon as he walked off, she switched off into &#8216;phew&#8217; mode and relaxed and walked home. I have a strong feeling something like this happened because it avoids the whole &#8216;how did he drag her into the dark alleys&#8217; problem (he never needed to because she indeed went there willingly- just walked there by herself!). It is at first counter-intuitive, but it is just the type of ploy a *advertiser censored* like this would use. Everyone is so fixated on the proximate moment, but if you forecast into the future a few mins, it is possible for him to skip into his car (maybe 15m up the road from Duchess Boutique), then do a u-turn, give Jill a friendly toot-toot with the horn on the way to the city- where he told her just a minute prior he was now headed- Jill waves goodbye and was now psychologically disarmed. He takes the victoria/percy route to end up right near her place somewhere at Lux Way, and encounters her somewhere around there. It solves all issues. So less is more. One step back (leaving her and driving off) to get two steps forward and be lying in wait for the ambush 5 mins later. Imagine how scared she would have been seeing that <modsnip> back in the side-streets. It would be like a bolt from the blue, given that she&#8217;d just dismissed the threat of him 5 mins prior. ****! This kind of a tactic is only possible by someone who has staked out this area thoroughly. I dare say police will be scouring months&#8217; worth of CCTV footage to see this <modsnip> prowling along the place.
Also, I believe he has used this area (and others besides) as his prowling ground so I think he knows these streets (and other hunting grounds) like the back of his hand and has staked out, stalked, monitored people along here, and maybe even Jill herself previously. <modsnip> So he has strategy and cunning up his sleeve.

RIP Jill. You are missed by many.

 

[summer_breeze]

Welcome to WebSleuths Paulie11! I'm sorry it is under the circumstances...

 

[GutFeeling!]

O/T - Well, in Victoria, it seems TV did change things, right? Isn't your TV censored in Victoria? You can't get certain programs or news? It seems the lawmakers, at least in the Victoria area, censor a lot of info. Which makes it understandable that citizens would turn to the internet.

Sorry to be off topic, just interesting the differences between this Victoria portion of Austrailia and the rest of the country.

Salem

Yes that's true, but with the internet and the social media how can they police it? It's one thing to tell the media not to publish things, but how do you police individuals?

Victorians posting on here are just looking at NSW and Queensland media outlets for the news.

It's not just Victoria that censor, it is just because this case is Victorian that they have. Had it happened in Sydney then New South Wales would be censored now.

I just can't see how they can beat a world wide media source like Facebook and Twitter - all my opinion.

As i said in an earlier post you want a cross section of the community on your jury, nowadays people use the internet a lot so naturally a cross section is going to include internet users and social media site users.

I just hope they don't turn to the American system where jurors are questioned about what happens in their personal lives.

The Casey Anthony case always comes to mind with that. I wonder if things would have been different (and I firmly believe they would have) if the Australian system was used.

Here are your 40 people, from these 40 you will select 20. The 40 people are given a number between 1 and 40. Those numbers are put into a box, shuffled around and plucked out. All the defense knows is that number 14, Gut Feeling is a journalist or home duties or nurse or secretary - they get to see me, I can be put aside based on the way I look, my name or my occupation - that's it. It is certainly a random cross section of the community - so how can they possibly stop social networking?
In the CA case, if this were done, there would have certainly been people that had followed the case, we saw them all excused. But she was supposed to be judged by her peers and we know she was Facebook happy lol So the argument could be "With all the questioning are you providing a fair cross-section of her peers?"

that is a simplified version of how it goes but it really isn't that different.

 

[summer_breeze]

http://www.lightingacandle.org/candles/view_group_candles/JM

Gentle reminder: No matter your belief system:


Repost on Facebook, or where-ever.

A silent but poignant tribute...

 

[Curiousasacat]

food for thought:

Respectfully snipped..

"She would have been consumed with dealing with the immediate and present danger of his being right there; but as soon as he walked off, she switched off into &#8216;phew&#8217; mode and relaxed and walked home."

Hi paulie, great first post.

The bit I have quoted above is exactly what I think she thought. The creep has left me alone and she let down her defences.


Justice needs to be served for Jill and all women alike.