Found Deceased Australia - Karen Ristevski, 47, Melbourne, Vic, 29 June 2016 - #5

[Amee]

MOBILE phones can prove a crucial tool in analysing the movements of suspects in a criminal investigation.


But experts warn the tracking technology isn’t the complete “smoking gun” that many *believe, and is complex.


“It’s not a very good indicator of a specific location,’’ Prof Coutts said. “It could be several kilometres away.


“It’s very useful in, shall we say, the rough-and-tumble of a police investigation.


“But then unfortunately, too many of those cases get to court and it actually does not constitute evidence.”

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/la...e/news-story/c0c30a0e5cb3c40bfcff881cab6515f3

 

[sleepinoz]

Sure, no one is denying, from an emotional, moral, humane, sympathetic perspective that finding Karen's body is the best result for her family, to properly honour her in death. I am, however, speaking about the legal standpoint and why the police are not currently arresting- whether they need a body to prove Borce killed Karen, or whether they can convict Borce based solely on evidence so far, which is phone pings. I am maintaining, different to other claims, that the CCTV footage is what is the priority here, not Karen's body to convict Borce. You have to place Borce up there, near Karen's phone. Finding Karen dead up there won't help convict Borce if Borce is not up there also- for he'll merely claim, YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, i drove the merc to test the fuel gauge, but came back and never went out that far- someone else OUT THAT FAR killed her. That is reasonable doubt. Would you convict Borce of Karen's murder if he was not placed, proved, located out as far as Karen's body? I wouldn't, but i would if he was claimed he was not in Gisborne on the day, if he said so, though phone pings show he indeed was, AND THEN, Karen's body was never found. Alternatively, we face finding Karen's body in Gisborne, though never being able to place Borce up there. In the latter scenario, no dice; no conviction. That is what i am saying. Sounds reasonable, sensible to me.

It will help if they know that Karen is dead. You can't legally try someone for a murder if there is no forensic evidence that she is actually dead - not a body in particular.

Yes her phone was there - was she with it? Was she alive or dead?

 

[Makara]

I disagree, Makara. The main priority here is the CCTV footage. Borce has been caught in a what can only be termed retrospective changes to recollection about his movements on the day. that is, he simply 'forgot' to mention he took Karen's car for a drive. Further, based on phone pings, he seems to have been caught flat out lying. I don't see what Karen's dead body will prove beyond what the phone pings already prove and Borce's own forgetful, and therefore damning, behaviour proves. If we find Karen was murdered- that won't show anything other than what is being implied in the media, and which most of the forum believes. Thus i claim that even on the strength of current evidence- sans body- they should charge, for i, and i assume others, would convict. Gerard Baden Clay wasn't caught on phone pings, right? That is why they needed Allison's body and the matching flora. A dead body is not always necessary, if the behaviour is suspicious enough to warrant prosecution. Borce's behaviour is damning enough, i believe, though they are not arresting based on searching through more CCTV footage to finalse the proof- but the search for Karen's body, while a simultaneous effort, is not the priority to obtain conviction.

BBM: Wrong. If you're interested in the Baden-Clay case in its entirety you can read here. You'll find the phone records of GBC, Allison, and the rest of the players in that case. I purchased the phone records when they were released after GBC's committal hearing and they were very damning indeed. These records were evidence woven together with other evidence, including the forensic evidence from Allison's body.

I won't discuss GBC any further here. This thread is for Karen.

 

[ScottKam]

It will help if they know that Karen is dead. You can't legally try someone for a murder if there is no forensic evidence that she is actually dead - not a body in particular.

Yes her phone was there - was she with it? Was she alive or dead?

I thought you can try someone in the absence of a body. Borce was caught lying about his movements on the day.

 

[sleepinoz]

I thought you can try someone in the absence of a body. Borce was caught lying about his movements on the day.

You can try someone in the absence of a body - but there must be something else to prove that they have been murdered or are deceased.

The Law does not assume.

 

[Itsapuzzle]

The dead have a story to tell and with a body the police have a lot ....... yes they are looking at pings but they will want to find Karen if she is deceased for her family and to bring justice for her.

Yes indeed, finding the body will give you the cause of death and that could solve the case too .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScottKam]

The idea is that lying is very damning. Alternatively, if you have a dead body, though cannot prove someone killed the person, then the dead body cannot do anything for the conviction; it merely remains a stillborn piece of evidence not speaking to who killed him/her.

Both situations have short-falls. I am saying that the police are awaiting CCTV footage, not necessarily the dead body. That is how i am reading it. And i recall reading that you can try someone for murder in the absence of a dead body.

If the police do not find Karen's body, then i am of the understanding that they will charge Borce with her murder- if they can prove her phone was up there and his phone locates him up there, and with his lying about not being up there, then he is cooked. Is this right or wrong?

I am not sure of the legal aspects. That is, i am not sure what you charge a person with who you KNOW did something to someone else, but cannot find a dead body to prove the person is dead, though through their lying, the perpetrator locates themselves near to where the dead body is not found..... hehehee ok, i've done enough here, i'm BUSHED. do people get what i am saying? maybe someone can clarify the points. i don't know the legal ramifications of Borce's actions vis-a-vis Karen's "missing" status.

the question is THIS: at what point can we charge Borce with the murder of Karen if Karen's dead body is never found? Is that possible at all? Are his lies about his movements enough for conviction or not? THAT is the question here.

I have, i believe, been setting up, to some extent, a false dichotomy between:

1) dead body; and,
2) lying perpetrator.

I think the reality is a combination of both, which i've been arguing against. It's not as black and white as i've been making it out- THOUGH MY QUESTION WAS- where does the line lie. That is, can Borce be charged with Karen's murder WITHOUT her body, if the only evidence is his lies placing his movements on the day? I guess the answer is NO. Hence, we wait.

 

[Makara]

I thought you can try someone in the absence of a body. Borce was caught lying about his movements on the day.

How do you know he was caught lying about his movements that day? He may well be telling the truth - in part. He just hasn't elaborated any further. If a prosecutor put forward to a jury that BR has been caught lying about his movements based on the information to date, the defense would have a field day and the case would be thrown out.

You asked what the police are waiting for, why haven't they arrested BR. So what do think they should arrest him for? Driving up the Calder Highway?? It doesn't work that way. The police would have evidence that we know nothing about. Every piece of evidence is a thread woven into the tapestry of what actually happened to Karen. Creating a tapestry of evidence can take a long time.

 

[Lou Lou]

It will help if they know that Karen is dead. You can't legally try someone for a murder if there is no forensic evidence that she is actually dead - not a body in particular.

Tell Lindy Chamberlain that.. There was also little Samantha Knights murderer, Michael Guider.. Samantha was never found.

 

[ScottKam]

How do you know he was caught lying about his movements that day? He may well be telling the truth - in part. He just hasn't elaborated any further. If a prosecutor put forward to a jury that BR has been caught lying about his movements based on the information to date, the defense would have a field day and the case would be thrown out.

You asked what the police are waiting for, why haven't they arrested BR. So what do think they should arrest him for? Driving up the Calder Highway?? It doesn't work that way. The police would have evidence that we know nothing about. Every piece of evidence is a thread woven into the tapestry of what actually happened to Karen. Creating a tapestry of evidence can take a long time.

I know he was lying because his second interview offered information which his first did not. That is damning.

I am assuming the police have phone pings of Borce all the way up to where Karen's phone pinged. That is what i am going on. Or, at the very least, they have more phone pings placing him in places where he did not admit to being on the day. I was of the understanding that the police have released less publicly than was privately available to them.

 

[Makara]

Conviction for murder in the absence of a body is possible. Historically, cases of this type have been hard to prove, forcing the prosecution to rely on other kinds of evidence, usually circumstantial. Modern developments in forensic science have made it less likely that such an act will go unpunished.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body

 

[ScottKam]

Conviction for murder in the absence of a body is possible. Historically, cases of this type have been hard to prove, forcing the prosecution to rely on other kinds of evidence, usually circumstantial. Modern developments in forensic science have made it less likely that such an act will go unpunished.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body

Yep. Hence soil samples taken from tyres on the Ristevski's vehicles and the shovel. That, too, is not absolute proof. What would be absolute proof? CCTV footage of Borce in Gisborne, a place he did not admit to being on the day. I would convict him based on that, even without a body. But if a body was found, though no evidence was provided of Borce in Gisborne, and no soil samples on tyres or shovels, then i wouldn't convict him.

 

[tappedin]

I know he was lying because his second interview offered information which his first did not. That is damning.

I am assuming the police have phone pings of Borce all the way up to where Karen's phone pinged. That is what i am going on. Or, at the very least, they have more phone pings placing him in places where he did not admit to being on the day. I was of the understanding that the police have released less publicly than was privately available to them.

Someone answer this question. If BR said he was driving up the Calder and then turned around when he hit that bump. The video from the general store in Toolern Vale might show BR driving past perhaps.

Wouldn't that indicate that he had forgot or lied again about where he was. Considerating Toolern is what another 9km out from Diggers?

Doesn't that give more incentive to charge for murder?

 

[ScottKam]

Someone answer this question. If BR said he was driving up the Calder and then turned around when he hit that bump. The video from the general store in Toolern Vale might show BR driving past perhaps.

Wouldn't that indicate that he had forgot or lied again about where he was. Considerating Toolern is what another 9km out from Diggers?

Doesn't that give more incentive to charge for murder?

Sure does. The devil will be in the timestamps, distances.

 

[drsleuth]

Conviction for murder in the absence of a body is possible. Historically, cases of this type have been hard to prove, forcing the prosecution to rely on other kinds of evidence, usually circumstantial. Modern developments in forensic science have made it less likely that such an act will go unpunished.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body

This is one such case which will be in the Supreme Court in October.........Leonie has never been found :-(

http://www.huntervalleynews.net.au/story/4118307/mother-to-stand-trial-in-supreme-court/?cs=1205

 

[tappedin]

Sure does. The devil will be in the timestamps, distances.

This is what gets me so angry with the system. All I see in the media/on tv is helicopters flying over farmland and looking at dams.

The first place I could think to dump a body would be in the Lerderderg state park. Why are they not searching there? It's an awfully big area. But jeez. Do a sweep of every road within the park.

 

[Makara]

This is what gets me so angry with the system. All I see in the media/on tv is helicopters flying over farmland and looking at dams.

The first place I could think to dump a body would be in the Lerderderg state park. Why are they not searching there? It's an awfully big area. But jeez. Do a sweep of every road within the park.

Maybe they already have and you just don't know about it.

 

[AcidStare]

This is what gets me so angry with the system. All I see in the media/on tv is helicopters flying over farmland and looking at dams.

The first place I could think to dump a body would be in the Lerderderg state park. Why are they not searching there? It's an awfully big area. But jeez. Do a sweep of every road within the park.

First thing I thought. If this is the case then the timeframe (2 hours) is pretty tight to dispose of a body / clothes / tools etc.

 

[tappedin]

Maybe they already have and you just don't know about it.

I think at that scale, you would need plenty of people and you would hear of it?

 

[tappedin]

First thing I thought. If this is the case then the timeframe (2 hours) is pretty tight to dispose of a body / clothes / tools etc.

Which means he either went to check on rhe body the day of the 29th or it is a **** cover job.