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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
ScottKam said:
Let's hope they find an intact human body.
Click to expand...

I hope police find Karen and her remains are intact. It would cause the people who love her much grief if she has suffered more indignity.
 
JLZ said:
In the absence of a body, there needs to be other evidence of death. (Edit: "remains".)

Moving on, what's that about the shovel? I think I remember that a shovel was taken from the BR residence for examination. Have the results of the examination been released? Many people have shovels.
Click to expand...

Well if Karen's phone pings up in Gisborne, and if Borce is caught on CCTV footage going to Gisborne, yet he claims that he was not near Gisborne; then is that enough to convict him of murder? He could be in a conspiracy with Karen to disappear, and she then uses that fake passport to travel elsewhere. That is an option. What would a jury buy? I know what i would buy, and it's not what Borce is peddling. I'm not sure what thresholds of evidence the police/prosecutors need to satisfy before charging Borce. I am not sure that remains are necessary.
 
:pillowfight2::slapfight::yourock:ScottKam......Glad to see you are being guided by your INTUITION......It works most of the time but not all the time.....Great to see you back....:tantrum:
 
tiddles24 said:
ScottKam......Glad to see you are being guided by your INTUITION......It works most of the time but not all the time.....Great to see you back....:tantrum:
Click to expand...

Thanks, tiddles, though i think my stay should be short, as i get the feeling i annoy people.................................... ;)

tiddles, pray do tell, what does one do when they get two sets of intuitions....... any advice on how to discern the proper intuition? hehehe
 
ScottKam said:
Well if Karen's phone pings up in Gisborne, and if Borce is caught on CCTV footage going to Gisborne, yet he claims that he was not near Gisborne; then is that enough to convict him of murder? He could be in a conspiracy with Karen to disappear, and then use that fake passport to travel elsewhere. That is an option. What would a jury buy? I know what i would buy, and it's not what Borce is peddling. I'm not sure what thresholds of evidence the police/prosecutors need to satisfy before charging Borce. I am not sure that remains are necessary.
Click to expand...
What if Karen's remains are found in Tasmania? Would you still be prepared to convict on the basis of lies about Gisborne? Just curious.
 
It's the old saying: When there are multiple possible explanations, the simplest one is usually correct. The simplest explanation for a situation is typically the one that looks like ones we've seen before.

It's not SR, AR, or VR. They may know things, they may have suspicions, but many people have staunch friends and family who will stand by their side, deny guilt, and make up anything to convince themselves until the evidence becomes overwhelming and they can stand with them no more. Of course, some people will never believe their loved one is guilty, but most will when the truth becomes apparent.

The no tears comments irk me - Lindy didn't cry either - and the lack of her tears was one overwhelming reason why people erroneously declared her guilty...
 
JLZ said:
What if Karen's remains are found in Tasmania? Would you still be prepared to convict on the basis of lies about Gisborne? Just curious.
Click to expand...

Very good question, JLZ. Earlier today I could see i was open to this criticism, but i couldn't be bothered to correct it. I suppose i should do so now. If Karen is found in Tasmania, then maybe Borce drove her to part of the way to Gisborne, put her in VR's car, and Borce drove back home, while VR drove her somewhere and she then somehow ended up in Tasmania. If Borce is caught driving to Gisborne, though only admitting to travelling half the way there, then obviously something has happened in Gisborne. What? Transferring Karen's body, certainly not mailing her to Tasmania. So who was his accomplice? AR? VR?

I was speaking specifically and particularly about lies about Gisborne in connection to the phone pings that showed Borce travelled part of the way there, though not the whole way. Lying shows concealing (of crime or protecting others who are criminals). That is the principle here. Based on this type of analysis and argument, then you could build a case for murder without a body. That's what i assume will happen in the absence of a body, replaced by a body of lies, which add up to beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction.

Did that satisfy you, JLZ? I wanted to say a bit more, but i can't think of it now.

Oh, and to answer your question, not sure if i would convict him. Perhaps, yes, i would. I think i would, yes. But he would also have an accomplice after the fact- transporting the body to tasmania- who would need finding.
 
LHouston said:
It's the old saying: When there are multiple possible explanations, the simplest one is usually correct. The simplest explanation for a situation is typically the one that looks like ones we've seen before.

It's not SR, AR, or VR. They may know things, they may have suspicions, but many people have staunch friends and family who will stand by their side, deny guilt, and make up anything to convince themselves until the evidence becomes overwhelming and they can stand with them no more. Of course, some people will never believe their loved one is guilty, but most will when the truth becomes apparent.

The no tears comments irk me - Lindy didn't cry either - and the lack of her tears was one overwhelming reason why people erroneously declared her guilty...
Click to expand...


Two words Occam's Razor.
 
ScottKam said:
Well if Karen's phone pings up in Gisborne, and if Borce is caught on CCTV footage going to Gisborne, yet he claims that he was not near Gisborne; then is that enough to convict him of murder? He could be in a conspiracy with Karen to disappear, and she then uses that fake passport to travel elsewhere. That is an option. What would a jury buy? I know what i would buy, and it's not what Borce is peddling. I'm not sure what thresholds of evidence the police/prosecutors need to satisfy before charging Borce. I am not sure that remains are necessary.
Click to expand...

In Karen's case, the discovery of her remains would allow timely collection of potentially vital forensic evidence from a suspected crime scene. It would enable an autopsy (or post mortem examination) to be conducted by a Forensic Pathologist. This would followed by a Coronial Inquest:

Victoria Police Forensic Services Department (General Information) (.PDF 153 kB):

https://www.google.com.au/url?q=htt...CCIwCQ&usg=AFQjCNE9d_hTO3Znip-Y6p5O9jCc4hE7jg

A Simplied Guide to Crime scene Investigation:

http://www.forensicsciencesimplified.org/csi/

Coroner's Court of Victoria:

http://www.coronerscourt.vic.gov.au/home/
 
Thanks Scottkam. I don't dispute that in some circumstances you can build a case for murder without a body.

This is from a a legal firm's website:

"A complete defence to murder is where the police fail to prove one or more of the elements of the offence.

The elements for murder are:

The victim died;

The act or omission of the accused caused the death of the victim;

The act of the accused was without lawful cause or excuse; and

The act or omission causing death was done by the accused:

with the intention to kill or do grievous bodily harm to some person;​

foreseeing that it was probable that the death of a person would result from the act or omission; or
​
in an attempt by the accused or some accomplice with him/her to commit, or during or immediately after the commission of by the accused or some accomplice with him/her, a serious indictable offence punishable by imprisonment for life or 25 years​

If we can prevent the police proving one of the elements to murder, you must be acquitted (found not guilty) of the offence of murder."

http://www.armstronglegal.com.au/criminal-law/defences/complete-defences-to-muder

Are we to take it that you consider that all of the elements of murder have been proved against BR, based on what we know of the situation from MSM?
 
I wonder if BR has had to do the strip off of his shirt ect. Remember gbc's incriminating marks on his chest ( supposed caterpillar bites)
 
ScottKam said:
Thanks, tiddles, though i think my stay should be short, as i get the feeling i annoy people.................................... ;)

tiddles, pray do tell, what does one do when they get two sets of intuitions....... any advice on how to discern the proper intuition? hehehe
Click to expand...

FYI Scott, you don't annoy me at all. Intuition, or a gut reaction, is a great tool when used in conjunction with known facts. Look up the 5Ws (also called the 6Ws) and remember the Principle of Parsimony (aka Occam's Razor or in lay terms 'Keep It Simple Stupid)*

*NB: I'm not calling you stupid, Scott. You're clearly not. They are alternative terms for the Principle of Parsimony.
 
This is interesting:

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/re...m/news-story/d19968b5c570d5e01a412663cba82215
Here is a quote which is intriguing:

His best friend Patrick Brady was charged with murder, but the only evidence the prosecutor could present to the jury was that Smith was last seen drinking with Brady at a Cronulla pub and that he had told police a stack of lies about his whereabouts and movements. The judge directed the jury to acquit. Brady has since died.
 
ScottKam said:
Lying shows concealing (of crime or protecting others who are criminals).
Click to expand...

Lying in this circumstance could mean protection of the wife who decided to go off the grid for good. Drop KR off at Gisbourne and she takes another mode of travel there on.
 
ScottKam said:
I must have picked it up from crime shows; it just slipped into my writing. I wasn't consciously saying it. But i don't think a reference to torso necessarily implies dismemberment. They always refer to torsos in tv crime shows. It just seems to be a world generally bandied about. I don't see why people fixated on it.
Click to expand...

Maybe corpse not torso?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
what lies has BR told, anyone have a link please?

IS BORCE RISTEVSKI TELLING POLICE EVERYTHING HE KNOWS?

He stopped co-operating with police following an July 8 interview with detectives in which he denied having anything to do with her disappearance.

According to the Herald Sun, when he was initially questioned about his movements on June 29, he failed to mention that he had taken his wife’s 2004 Mercedes Benz for a drive down the Calder Hwy in order to “assess a faulty fuel gauge”.

http://www.news.com.au/national/vic...i/news-story/260b168c1f12bfa5569a2db5ded7b713

The Herald Sun reports Borce Ristevski has told family members he thinks an evil stranger is behind his wife’s disappearance from Avondale Heights on June 29

https://au.news.yahoo.com/vic/a/324...family-evil-stranger-abducted-his-wife/#page1
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 216 more.
Total: 1,892 (members: 217, guests: 1,675)

Online statistics

Members online
217
Guests online
1,675
Total visitors
1,892
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,534
Messages
18,096,250
Members
230,871
Latest member
Where is Jennifer*
Back
Top