Found Deceased Australia - Karen Ristevski, 47, Melbourne, Vic, 29 June 2016 - #16 *Arrest*

[Trooper]

Did Sarah collude with her father in this and her mother not know?

It's hard to not take this conclusion on board to the fullest extent...…

 

[sosocurious]

Anyone else finding WS verrrrrry slow today?

Yes frustratingly so.

 

[kiwilaura]

It's hard to not take this conclusion on board to the fullest extent...…

Borce could have opened the company and assigned Sarah as a stakeholder without her knowing. Generally directors assign the stakeholders.

Everyone seems SO keen to make Sarah a guilty party, yet the cops don’t seem to think so.... I’m guessing her story and alibi checks out...

 

[SouthAussie]

I am still way back reading about the intent of Borce's lawyers to request that the murder charge be reduced to manslaughter.

What are they going to allege ... that Borce was acting in self defence?? That Karen attacked him?

.... can’t understand why anyone would harm such a “kind, gentle soul”
“She’s a really gentle soul, she’s never annoyed anyone from my knowledge … She’s so happy-go-lucky and wouldn’t hurt anyone.”
“I just think … She was that sort of person, that nice, kind, loving … If it was random it would be horrific.”
Karen Ristevski: ‘She wouldn’t run away’

 

[Oz Jen]

Hahaha ... whoops

Thanks for that. Just edited my jetlagged post to reflect the correct company name.

Though, I would like to see Borce in his sparklies ... pumping out a Eurovision routine.

I can't unsee this.

 

[tmar]

Anyone else finding WS verrrrrry slow today?

Maybe because we're all on together.
Hope doesn't crash.

 

[kiwilaura]

I am still way back reading about the intent of Borce's lawyers to request that the murder charge be reduced to manslaughter.

What are they going to allege ... that Borce was acting in self defence?? That Karen attacked him?

.... can’t understand why anyone would harm such a “kind, gentle soul”
“She’s a really gentle soul, she’s never annoyed anyone from my knowledge … She’s so happy-go-lucky and wouldn’t hurt anyone.”
“I just think … She was that sort of person, that nice, kind, loving … If it was random it would be horrific.”
Karen Ristevski: ‘She wouldn’t run away’

They don’t have to allege anything. They just need to assert that the prosecution doesn’t have enough evidence for a murder conviction and therefore the charges need to be downgraded to manslaughter. It’s not an indication that Borce’s story is about to change in any way.

 

[sosocurious]

This article says police cannot say how Karen was killed. They allege Borce "incapcitated" Karen at the house that morning after a fight over finances. He then drove her up the Calder to Mt Macedon.

Category: | Herald Sun
Borce Ristevski committal hearing told family was in ‘dire’ financial situation before Karen’s death

 

[SouthAussie]

They don’t have to allege anything. They just need to assert that the prosecution doesn’t have enough evidence for a murder conviction and therefore the charges need to be downgraded to manslaughter. It’s not an indication that Borce’s story is about to change in any way.

So, evidently his lawyers think there is enough evidence to convict him of Karen's untimely death? They will not try to claim his innocence, even though it is said that he is going to plead not guilty?


March 6, 2017
• Borce Ristevski charged with murder and faces court where a lawyer indicates a not-guilty plea. He is remanded in custody

April 18, 2018
• Ristevski’s two-week committal hearing starts, aiming to determine if there is enough evidence to go to trial.
Ristevski daughter breaks her silence

 

[kiwilaura]

I’m very interested in this case and have followed it since the beginning. But it’s so frustrating to see how adamant people are that Sarah was involved in killing her mother.

Grounds seem to be:
- she went overseas (she’s 21, life actually does continue. I lost my dad at 20 and I still travelled and had fun, I also had days of despair-filled crippling grief)
- she seems to be protecting her dad (is it really that hard to accept that she just loves him so much that she’s willing to believe all his lies 100%??)
- she focuses on herself during cross examination, seems self centred (really? She lost her mum, oh and she’s a millennial lol)
- she asked for clarification for a simple question (when I wasn a witness in a trial, I was told if I had even a shred of doubt about a question I needed to seek clarification)
- she didn’t look at her dad when on the stand (again, you’re advised to do this when giving evidence).

I’m honestly flabbergasted that so many people are out to string her up. Isn’t this a victim friendly forum? She’s a victim too.

Borce is on trial, he highly likely killed his wife, for all the reasons we have suspected all along. Sarah is not on trial, so everyone should just move past that. Stop hating on her just because she doesn’t fit your predefined image of a grieving daughter.

 

[Armchair snoop]

You don't think the motive, of money, insurance, super, Karen's inheritance, can be a premeditated action for murder!

I don't think that the prosecution has shown that to be the case yet tmar. I'm hoping they have more to come but surly at a committal hearing you would provide your strongest evidence to ensure you get a finding to stand trial for murder.
It would be great to know what occurred prior to her disappearance/murder. For example, had Karen told Borce that she has had enough and intended to leave him. Did Borce find out that Karen intended to leave him and hence couldn't handle the 'family' shame of her leaving him. Did he then plan to murder her and looked for areas to dispose of the body. And so it goes on, still more questions.
During the whole process before the discovery of Karen's body this case has raised many unanswered questions, and now we have an accused and still it raises more questions. Damn it Borce just tell the truth for once in your life and stop living a lie. Sorry got angry.

 

[kiwilaura]

So, evidently his lawyers think there is enough evidence to convict him of Karen's untimely death? They will not try to claim his innocence, even though it is said that he is going to plead not guilty?


March 6, 2017
• Borce Ristevski charged with murder and faces court where a lawyer indicates a not-guilty plea. He is remanded in custody

April 18, 2018
• Ristevski’s two-week committal hearing starts, aiming to determine if there is enough evidence to go to trial.
Ristevski daughter breaks her silence

Yes, they are going to continue to claim his innocence. They are arguing that the prosecution doesn’t have the level of evidence to support a murder charge. They are still going to argue he didn’t do it. Prosecution would be mad not to argue this, though I think in this case they’ll be declined. Why would they do it? Cos if they can’t get him off altogether, the penalty for MS is far lighter.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes, they are going to continue to claim his innocence. They are arguing that the prosecution doesn’t have the level of evidence to support a murder charge. They are still going to argue he didn’t do it. Prosecution would be mad not to argue this, though I think in this case they’ll be declined. Why would they do it? Cos if they can’t get him off altogether, the penalty for MS is far lighter.

I will take your opinion on board, though I believe that if the defence think they can prove Borce's innocence the nature of the charge should not matter (to them).

It is not up to them to decide/influence the charge. That is the prosecutor's responsibility.
It is their job to defend against the charge.

Evidently, they are concerned about defending against either charge. And I can see why.

 

[sosocurious]

“If you can’t cover your rent, wages and stock you’re not going to be surviving and this business wasn’t covering that.”

Mr Curtin said a company called Warrant Brands, of which the Ristevskis were directors, had traded as the fashion store Bella Bleu.

But as of July 1, 2016 a new company called Envirovision, directed by Ristevski with daughter Sarah as shareholder, had evolved.

“All the revenue from Bella Bleu was going into this company,” Mr Curtin said. “As at June 30, Warrant Brands no longer has any income.

“I’ve got absolutely no idea why that would’ve occurred. It has no real impact on the liabilities of Warrant Brands.”

Nocookies
Borce Ristevski committal hearing: Karen Ristevski’s dress shop in ‘constant financial struggle’

 

[kiwilaura]

I will take your opinion on board, though I believe that if the defence think they can prove Borce's innocence the nature of the charge should not matter (to them).

It is not up to them to decide/influence the charge. That is the prosecutor's responsibility.
It is their job to defend against the charge.

Evidently, they are concerned about defending against either charge. And I can see why.

Of course they’re worried.

But if they fail in their defence of him, which charge do you think they would prefer to fail against? The one that gets him up to 10 years in jail, or the one that gets him life?

 

[SouthAussie]

Of course they’re worried.

But if they fail in their defence of him, which charge do you think they would prefer to fail against? The one that gets him up to 10 years in jail, or the one that gets him life?

Exactly my point. To me, they are showing their (weak) hand.
They have seen all the evidence.

Still not seeing how they intend to show the evidence supports manslaughter as opposed to murder. Unless they admit some culpability on Borce's part.

 

[kiwilaura]

[QUOTE="It is not up to them to decide/influence the charge. That is the prosecutor's responsibility.
It is their job to defend against the charge.

[/QUOTE]

RSBM. Actjally, as the defence, they deal with ensuring that the law is applied correctly. They are going to argue that the evidence the prosecution is presenting does not meet the legal standard required for a murder charge. I would say they will argue that the charge was incorrectly brought to court and should have been manslaughter in the first place.

If you think the defence has no legal obligation to ensure the charges laid are the appropriate ones, then you are mistaken.

 

[Armchair snoop]

But in December 2015, Mr Ristevski started Envirovision and named himself the director. His daughter, Sarah Ristevski, was a stakeholder. There was no mention in court of Karen’s involvement, if any.

Mr Curtin said Envirovision became effective on July 1, 2016, “for some reason” and “basically took on sales revenue from the shop”.

Prosecutor Matt Fisher asked him to explain why that might have happened.

“From a forensic accounting point of view, why did Envirovision take on that role?” he asked.

“I have got absolutely no idea why that would’ve occurred,” Mr Curtin said. “I don’t know. I really don’t know.”

Mr and Ms Ristevski were in a dire financial situation. Their Avondale Heights home had been refinanced twice in 2013 via loans totalling $750,000. By June 30, 2016, the couple had managed to reduce the loans by only $8000, the court heard.

Bella Bleu had lost more than $320,000 over four years and the Ristevskis also had several loans and a credit card debt of more than $80,000.

Ristevski family’s ‘constant struggle’

Wow thanks 'Sleep' you have restored my faith. I was swaying towards manslaughter but could this be the motive that sends him to a murder trial. I hope so.
Great stuff 'Sleep" thanks.

 

[kiwilaura]

I don’t think the idea of Borce pleading guilty to manslaughter & the change in story that would require is on the table or has even been aired as a possibility.

The magistrate asked the court what they intend to do when all witnesses have been heard.

Borce’s SC replied that he intended to make a submission tomorrow that there is insufficient evidence to send Borce to trial for murder, and argue that if Borce is sent to trial, it should be to face a charge of manslaughter instead.

There was no suggestion that he would plead guilty to this charge - it is just submitting the legal argument that there is at most sufficient evidence to justify a trial on manslaughter charges, and insufficient evidence to justify a murder trial.

The lack of a cause of death may be what the submission will be based upon - we will find out tomorrow. Mr Hallowes will argue that at least one of the criteria for a murder charge hasn’t been met.

Borce’s legal team indicated to 9news that ‘If that happens, his lawyers have told 9NEWS Mr Ristevski will plead not guilty’ [to downgraded manslaughter charges] : Karen Ristevski's remains found with 'skull intact'

Amalgam also made this point quite clearly. Requesting downgraded charges is not in any way a reflection of guilt.

 

[Trooper]

Of course they’re worried.

But if they fail in their defence of him, which charge do you think they would prefer to fail against? The one that gets him up to 10 years in jail, or the one that gets him life?

I hardly think the word ' fail ' in this context passes across the mind of the Barristers appointed to represent Borce. They get paid, at agreed rates 'win, lose or draw' regardless of which charge he goes to trial on. Borce's fate is not something that Barristers can afford to lose sleep over. There are so many clients, so little time.

I happen to think that the foundation the defence barristers are presenting.. in other words, 'alleging' , the one where it cant be definitively stated as to the cause of Karen's death is flimsy at best, and disingenuous at worst.

But it's worth a try, and it's par for the course for the defence to try and float it.

I just don't think it will be granted. There is very little precedence for it, in this context. There is some, but not enough, in my opinion.