Found Deceased Australia - Karen Ristevski, 47, Melbourne, Vic, 29 June 2016 - #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oona said:
IMO Karen was incapacitated or killed at home and was not wearing shoes at the time (a lot of people do not wear shoes indoors). BR then moved Karen's body to the car. He remembered her bag, purse, phone and the unexplained $850 cash but overlooked that for his "gone for a walk" story to hold water she would need to be wearing shoes.
When questioned about which pair of shoes she was wearing he had several options:

say he couldn't recall which shoes (most likely),
say she might have been barefoot (unlikely)
or describe a fictional pair of shoes (too risky IMO).

Even with a vast wardrobe of shoes, most people only wear a few pairs on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

The case that first brought me to Websleuths had exactly this, it turned out that the victim had been killed by someone who iived in her shared house, he took her body to his car to hide without her shoes as he'd killed her inside her flat. Her body was eventually found by chance by the ubiqitous dog walker and IIRC they car was found eventually on CCTV.
 
What I don't understand is why the police didn't just put some black shoes on the mannequin or whatever colour Karen normally wears. It not like someone's going to be thinking, gee, I saw someone wearing those clothes walking along the river but she was wearing flats so I won't bother calling it in. I wonder what the significance is.
 
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...e/news-story/700c6ba8e2e609893ad1cbc6de2f3c24

The brother of missing Melbourne woman Karen Ristevski has defended his sister’s husband, declaring he remains close to Borce Ristevski despite speculation about the businessman’s version of events in the lead-up to his wife’s disappearance and possible murder.

Melbourne-based Stephen Williams said people would have a different opinion over what happened to his sister if there weren’t misinformation about the case in the media, which members of the Ristevski family believe is being fuelled by police.

I think all this was just taken from SW's comments on the Where is Karen page and made into a story?
 
suzyjackson said:
What I don't understand is why the police didn't just put some black shoes on the mannequin or whatever colour Karen normally wears. It not like someone's going to be thinking, gee, I saw someone wearing those clothes walking along the river but she was wearing flats so I won't bother calling it in. I wonder what the significance is.
Click to expand...

I honestly think that the police didn't put shoes on the mannequin because they weren't sure what shoes she was wearing and BR and/or SR weren't sure either. And that is that. It's like when witnesses are asked to give a description of a perp and they have the police sketcher (total mind blank on what they're actually called sorry!) draw up what the person describes. If the person cannot remember their ears/nose/hair etc then they will leave it blank and not fill it in so as not to provide false information.
 
Itsapuzzle said:
That KRs car left on the 28th is certainly possible. Have been thinking about it ..... I had this theory that KR and BR left in KRs car on the 29th to go and meet AR at Diggers Rest, maybe in a park or somewhere, but that can't be because Bella Bleu opens at 9 am on a Wednesday and KR would have rung work to say she'll be late in, wouldn't she, I mean, I think she was pretty organised.
Click to expand...

Could hv left late in the 28th, perhaps a domestic incident after work, KR was taken in her car at night (semi conscious may be) and disposed of and BR returns on the 29th. Maybe AR assisted him.
 
they'll get you said:
I doubt my family would know what shoes were missing. For example I have 3 pairs of joggers, 1 old pair for around the garden, one I wear out walking and another pair that haven't been worn yet. All the same brand. Same as my Birkenstocks and 3 pairs of black flats etc.
My family including my daughter wouldn't have a clue.

I suspect this is what's happened, Karen's family might not know that 100%.
Click to expand...




It's not easy to keep certain types of shoes on someone who is comatose and has to be dragged around or carried in and out of a vehicle. Such shoes could easily fall off anywhere random and become a clue. This is if it's thongs, or moccasins or any type of slip on. If it was boots or sneakers/runners or strappy shoes with buckles, its different, they may stay firm on the foot.
The average Melbourne weather for 29th June was between 8 and 17 degrees.
Generally, people arent usually buried with shoes on and subconsciously this may have been removed if KR was being transported for such a task to be completed.
 
LexR said:
I honestly think that the police didn't put shoes on the mannequin because they weren't sure what shoes she was wearing and BR and/or SR weren't sure either. And that is that. It's like when witnesses are asked to give a description of a perp and they have the police sketcher (total mind blank on what they're actually called sorry!) draw up what the person describes. If the person cannot remember their ears/nose/hair etc then they will leave it blank and not fill it in so as not to provide false information.
Click to expand...

It was winter. Leaving the house at 10am (allegedly) kinda gives one an idea what KRs possible shoe choices were. Maybe the mannequin was left barefooted to see if the family suggested what footwear she must have been wearing, by process of elimination, unless she was an Imelda Marcos, which is possible too.
 
Three words:

Follow the money.

Hopefully the police are keeping a watchful eye on the spending habits of those close to Karen.
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

"The tightened search area comes days after her daughter Sarah Ristevski, 21, began her own search and reached out to the Missing Persons Advocacy Network for help.

However, he non-profit organisation, which seeks to reunite loved ones, has only been able to offer minimal advice as it does not ‘associate with criminal cases’. "

Why would missing persons advocacy state that this was a criminal case. How do they pick and choose which missing person they can help and isn't related to crime?
 
I feel terrible thinking it but one scenario in my head was what happens when you find out your mother pkans to leave you when you turn 21 for your meth addicted half brother - fight erupts - dad covers.
 
Can't get out of my head why BR would turn his phone off for two hours. I don't know a businessman who turns his phone off ever.
 
they'll get you said:
I love your brilliant posts Estelle.

Another Ristevski will be travelling in the back of a car soon.
Pack a bag & don't forget the clean undies.
Click to expand...
TGY.....When you say that ANOTHER RISTEVSKI will be travelling in the back of a car soon, are you thinking BR and SR at this stage or BR and VR???.....Interested in your thoughts....:tyou:
 
Just regarding the shoes, how about coming at it from this angle ..... her height, was she shorter or taller, asking BR or SR, maybe they could remember that, 5 foot 2/160, their line of vision ..... I shall now move away from my shoe fixation, hee hee .... however, I do believe this going for a walk at 10 is all poppycock, shop opened at 9 anyway.
 
If BR was out from the 28th and hadnt returned home until the 29th, maybe his battery died and he had no charger with him and thus his phone was off for 2 hours. Probably charged his phone on returning home. This would explain how his phone pinged at Diggers Rest.
 
Didn't someone say earlier on the thread that SR was wearing Coach shoes at the press conference? If Karen was very fashion and style orientated she was probably very 'matchy matchy' ..(a phrase coined by my family for my super fashion conscious sister, who would never be seen without 'matching' shoes and handbag....)

i.e you don't carry a black handbag and wear white shoes.

I know the young ones tend to mix it up a bit I know ....but Karen's style seemed pretty conservative,

The daughter would know this ? Being close to the mum? Surely she would be able to make a guess what shoes Katen would have worn with the coach bag. 'Oh Mum always wore her cream flats with that bag or her Coach shoes.'...oh but wait.

The daughter has the Coach shoes? Maybe as someone speculated, they both got the coach shoes? Or is possible they shared some items such as handbags? Surely not shoes though? I wouldn't share my shoes. Everyone has different wear patterns IMO
Just thinking aloud really.......

Sorry if the shoes are actually Gucci? I wouldn't know one from the other!
 
All this talk about shoes made me wonder what jewellery Karen was wearing when she disappeared. I've looked at as many pics as I can find of her, there are not many views of her left hand so I can't tell if she regularly wore a wedding ring.
I wonder if pawn shop owners have been issued an alert to watch out for any jewellery that she may have been wearing.

IIRC, when Jennifer Ramsaran went missing, her wedding ring was found at her home.

1468530339717.jpg

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/search-for-missing-mum-karen-ristevski-20160713-gq5a3r.html
 
1968 said:
Didn't someone say earlier on the thread that SR was wearing Coach shoes at the press conference? If Karen was very fashion and style orientated she was probably very 'matchy matchy' ..(a phrase coined by my family for my super fashion conscious sister, who would never be seen without 'matching' shoes and handbag....)

i.e you don't carry a black handbag and wear white shoes.

I know the young ones tend to mix it up a bit I know ....but Karen's style seemed pretty conservative,

The daughter would know this ? Being close to the mum? Surely she would be able to make a guess what shoes Katen would have worn with the coach bag. 'Oh Mum always wore her cream flats with that bag or her Coach shoes.'...oh but wait.

The daughter has the Coach shoes? Maybe as someone speculated, they both got the coach shoes? Or is possible they shared some items such as handbags? Surely not shoes though? I wouldn't share my shoes. Everyone has different wear patterns IMO
Just thinking aloud really.......

Sorry if the shoes are actually Gucci? I wouldn't know one from the other!
Click to expand...

Agreed. Shoes would be complimentary to the outfit. If police knew they were black (or cream, or gold, or whatever) they could have thrown that colour shoe onto the mannequin.
I would imagine Karen's work associates would have a good idea of what Karen would wear with certain work outfits.

I've also wondered if Karen left a pair of trusty sneakers by the door for her walks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 109 more.
Total: 3,385 (members: 110, guests: 3,275)

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
3,275
Total visitors
3,385
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,351
Messages
18,171,016
Members
232,420
Latest member
Txwoman
Back
Top