Found Deceased Australia - Stephanie Scott, 26, Leeton, NSW, 5 April 2015 - #2 *Arrests*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trooper said:
Since he isn't speaking, Fuskier.. it will have to come from outside sources, inevitably.. I cant see him breaking down now and explaining the whole thing. Hard job for his solicitor.

I wonder if he had a practice run somewhere back in time. Someone .. . we are not going to hear it from him , though, not in a thousand years.. her last hours are his to hold .
Click to expand...

May be his mother and brother(s) can be encouraged to coax information from Vincent.
 
alioop said:
I reckon they have already tried.
Click to expand...

May I expand a little: his mother and brothers are all the people he had close daily contact with over the 24 years of his life. He would have some degree of attachment relationship with them. Anticipating that their own shock & emotional distress may prevent them from being as helpful as they could be, they would benefit from clinical forensic & police support/ guidance with what questions to ask, how & when to do it. I imagine it as a dynamic & ongoing timed process, not a one-off static attempt. I imagine that to ease their burden of relaying information to police, that their time with Vincent be covertly CCTV recorded rather than the intrusiveness of a 2-way mirror. Just a few further thoughts.
 
The Mamamia website has an article in their news section that says the body was "partially burned" but I have not read that anywhere else.
 
Ms Morgan asked for a three-month adjournment for forensic evidence and a post mortem examination report to be obtained.

She said she was not expecting that material to be available for three months.

Mr Davidge said Stanford had not been legally represented up until this point.

He said the Legal Aid Commission had contacted him on Wednesday about representing Stanford on Thursday.

He said to assist the court and Stanford, he would receive the partial brief of evidence and pass it on to the lawyer who is ultimately instructed in the case.

Mr Davidge said he had explained to Stanford what was happening and would start an application for legal aid.

“I can see no reason why legal aid will not be extended,” Mr Davidge said

Mr Pearce said the requested adjournment was well outside the guidelines, but he would grant it because of the serious nature of what was alleged and the fresh charge.

He gave the Crown until September 9 to submit the brief and adjourned the case to Griffith Local Court on September 30 for Stanford’s defence to reply to the brief.

http://www.dailyadvertiser.com.au/s...ainst-stephanie-scotts-alleged-killer/?cs=148
 
I'm sure they would have sent Vincent's mother in to try and coax some info out of him. From what I've read, Vincent didn't like Luke and was unhappy that he returned to Australia with the family.

Have to agree with Trooper's photographic concept. Also, what's the bet they knew it occurred between 1:40pm to 2:00pm from the timestamps of the photos.
 
http://www.dailyadvertiser.com.au/st...killer/?cs=148

Magistrate Pearce asked the man on the videolink screen if he was Vincent Stanford. He acknowledged that he was.
Magistrate Pearce then read the fresh charge to Stanford, who only learnt of the new allegation just before his court appearance.

Stanford is charged with the murder and additional charge of aggravated sexual assault of 26-year-old Miss Scott at Leeton on April 5.
 
One thought at the side:

Could it be, VS as a technic/computer freak had secretly installed something like a surveillance camera in school rooms (unnoticed by teachers / director / other cleaning staff) .....? Certainly he was informed, where to find Stephanie's class room or the teacher's room.
 
Interesting that VS has had no legal representation this whole time. This could only be because he has refused it and it would have been offered to him many times. Also I think he would have been assessed to determine his mental capacity to understand what was happening to him because if he had been assessed as mentally incapable, he would have had a lawyer appointed by the court.
It appears he finally agreed to a lawyer just prior to the court mention. So now a legal aid application will be made for him.
 
sleuthermelb said:
I'm sure they would have sent Vincent's mother in to try and coax some info out of him. From what I've read, Vincent didn't like Luke and was unhappy that he returned to Australia with the family.

Have to agree with Trooper's photographic concept. Also, what's the bet they knew it occurred between 1:40pm to 2:00pm from the timestamps of the photos.
Click to expand...

Yes!... the time stamps.. because that time is very particular, is it not.. also.. Stanford didn't get rid of the camera... he couldn't bear to. He tried to rid himself of a lot of things, the Ipad, her phone (?) her body, stuff. ..

but the camera... that was his treasure , his reward, his fantasy made real, it had the most damning evidence on it, but still, he could not bring himself to discard it..
 
Indeed.

It's an awful thought but I'm guessing Vincent filmed the rape. Speculation, of course, but it was probably on another device than the camera or phone which contained the photo(s) of the burned body.
 
sleuthermelb said:
Indeed.

It's an awful thought but I'm guessing Vincent filmed the rape. Speculation, of course, but it was probably on another device than the camera or phone which contained the photo(s) of the burned body.
Click to expand...

I agree, sleuthmelb... thinking it thru, he photographs and films the 'event'... as he would term it , I bet. .. because the record is everything , isn't it.. I am curious now about what other pics, or film was found in house of other days, other occasions.. it would be hard to imagine this being his first attempt at filming . Along with aggravated rape, assault, and murder, and interference with a corpse, surely he had to be at least mildly skilled with the one piece of equipment that records it all for later.......
 
It is interesting that , apparently, Stanford and his legal rep of the day only found out about these extra charges today, in court.. seems the police didn't find it worthwhile to question him about this, due, probably to his relentless silence on any matter..and it must have been a shock to his mother and brother, I am sure the NSW police would have informed Stephanie's parents and Aaron etc. it wouldn't have been a cold call on them today, surely not.

I am sure the NSW Police wouldn't ask his mother to question him on any sexual matters, surely to god not, nor the brother for that matter, bit dicey..
 
If there was photographic evidence of the attack, then I agree, it wasn't on the same camera with photos of the body. Surely the police would have added that charge at the time of his arrest... unless they were mindful of the distress it would cause? Puzzling.
 
Angeline said:
If there was photographic evidence of the attack, then I agree, it wasn't on the same camera with photos of the body. Surely the police would have added that charge at the time of his arrest... unless they were mindful of the distress it would cause? Puzzling.
Click to expand...

I just want to make it clear, that I am assuming its photographic evidence... on the grounds that no one else was there ( no corroborating visual evidence ) the victim is dead , and the charge is highly articulated, ie. aggravated sexual assault.. that presupposes some sort of hard evidence to make that charge. It's not a frivolous upgrade, naturally, it has to be backed up by some unarguable evidence and all I can think of is photographic evidence .. my imagination has come to a screaming halt at that.

I am starting from the point that nothing was recoverable from her burned body, in this context.. that could be a leap of logic, but she wasn't found for quite some time, I don't know how far the burning went though...
 
I am a very visual person, so I don't want to assume anything, because imagining it hurts.
It takes a very brave community to face what they must be feeling tonight.

Trooper said:
I just want to make it clear, that I am assuming its photographic evidence... on the grounds that no one else was there ( no corroborating visual evidence ) the victim is dead , and the charge is highly articulated, ie. aggravated sexual assault.. that presupposes some sort of hard evidence to make that charge. It's not a frivolous upgrade, naturally, it has to be backed up by some unarguable evidence and all I can think of is photographic evidence .. my imagination has come to a screaming halt at that.

I am starting from the point that nothing was recoverable from her burned body, in this context.. that could be a leap of logic, but she wasn't found for quite some time, I don't know how far the burning went though...
Click to expand...
 
"The first images of the man accused of murdering school teacher Stephanie Scott have emerged after a court hearing today."

http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...er-to-face-griffith-court#gTpXEehYS74D4jry.99

150604_raw_griffith1.ashx
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 121 more.
Total: 1,573 (members: 122, guests: 1,451)

Online statistics

Members online
122
Guests online
1,451
Total visitors
1,573
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,280
Messages
18,093,757
Members
230,840
Latest member
Zoyasalas
Back
Top