Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat 100km NW of Melbourne, 4 Feb 2024 #3

[SouthAussie]

I could be wrong South, but a search of any property would require a search warrant regardless. JMO

A search warrant isn't necessary if the owner says yes they can search. I think it is called search by consent (though they should get each owner to sign a consent to cover their backsides).

But if they then get to court (because they found evidence there) I could see a good defence lawyer getting evidence thrown out due to no search warrant, if the owner hasn't signed a consent form due to the haste/emergency of a missing persons search.

imo

 

[ChuckE]

More th

And drive at the same time? Sounds challenging to me.

More than one party involved

 

[Bats]

What scenarios do you have?

Well, to be honest, quite a few still. There's so much we don't know. Some obvious, some not so.

 

[Deleted member 293720]

This^^^^^ is what came to my mind … and also possibly warrants for vehicles…

I think Police know a lot more than they are publicly saying ….But I was pleased they gave another update today ….

I also think the press on the ground in Ballarat know a lot more than they are publishing, (for purposes of the investigation) … You can tell by the questions … IMO

Those journalists asked some good questions, straight to the point

 

[Nikynoo]

This^^^^^ is what came to my mind … and also possibly warrants for vehicles…

I think Police know a lot more than they are publicly saying ….But I was pleased they gave another update today ….

I also think the press on the ground in Ballarat know a lot more than they are publishing, (for purposes of the investigation) … You can tell by the questions … IMO

Yes, I thought the same. I hope they don’t know more than the police!!

 

[T-dawg420]

I think it would be harder to manage her alive. I suggest the reason more than one person is suspected is that police know not only that she went into the forest on foot, but that at some stage she was also transported in a vehicle, alive and potentially kicking.

I’ve wondered if with all the digital data they’ve got a hold of if that includes GPS of SM’s trip. With how accurate the GPS is it can pinpoint how fast someone is travelling etc.

I remember with the Theo Hayez case his GPS showed certain points of his path were faster then the others. This lead some to theorise he may have been running or in a vehicle at certain points. The map I saw of his GPS literally gave times of where he was and when.

I wonder if that’s the kinda info LE has of SM, and how they know she entered the forest on foot, and then perhaps the GPS shows she left at a far greater pace.

JMO

 

[Deleted member 293720]

Yes, I thought the same. I hope they don’t know more than the police!!

They won't.

The police are highly trained. More than one, better for the police as someone will talk, slip up under the police interview

It's the calm before the storm

 

[ChuckE]

Well, to be honest, quite a few still. There's so much we don't know. Some obvious, some not so.

Please share

 

[SouthAussie]

I’ve wondered if with all the digital data they’ve got a hold of if that includes GPS of SM’s trip. With how accurate the GPS is it can pinpoint how fast someone is travelling etc.

I remember with the Theo Hayez case his GPS showed certain points of his path were faster then the others. This lead some to theorise he may have been running or in a vehicle at certain points. The map I saw of his GPS literally gave times of where he was and when.

I wonder if that’s the kinda info LE has of SM, and how they know she entered the forest on foot, and then perhaps the GPS shows she left at a far greater pace.

JMO

I think it is the kind of information they may have. Mark Hatt said in the presser ..... "“We believe she then travelled on foot into the Canadian State Forest, which she embarked on a run for a period of time and made her way to the Mount Clear area."

They also have ruled out a medical incident. This could be from the pattern of the GPS tracking and/or from an Apple watch health monitoring app (heart rate etc).

We learned so much about GPS tracking in Theo's case, very useful info when needed.

imo (link to the presser further back in the threads)

 

[SLouTh]

I am getting Borce vibes.....

I will admit that Supt Hatt’s reply, “MM is not a suspect, at this stage“ ….has made me wonder about the clarification statement “at this stage” why not just say “no” ???

I have no idea if it means anything or not??? But I did notice it in the presser…

I also got the feeling from the presser that someone “close to home” may be being looked at closely…. (But not necessarily MM)

IMO

“At this stage he is not (a suspect). Everyone in relation to Samantha is a person of interest. In our investigation we are speaking to everyone that was in her life.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/police-search-new-area-for-clues-in-samantha-murphy-disappearance/news-story/1732d04e62062b2133033ea34c4b767c

 

[Tishy]

A search warrant isn't necessary if the owner says yes they can search. I think it is called search by consent (though they should get each owner to sign a consent to cover their backsides).
e
But if they then get to court (because they found evidence there) I could see a good defence lawyer getting evidence thrown out due to no search warrant, if the owner hasn't signed a consent form due to the haste/emergency of a missing persons search.

imo

Not sure about VIC but in SA, being a Detective automatically confers powers of GSW. Interesting area, Search Warrants vs 'informed consent' and ultimately judiciary has powers to consider whether evidence may be admitted or not. Informed consent cannot comprise searching for one thing (eg a gun possibly used in a bank robbery) then oh looky looky what do we have here, the bloodstained knife used by Jack the Ripper would not fly. To use a far-fetched example.

edit correct state, IMO

 

[OptimusLime]

I will admit that Supt Hatt’s reply, “MM is not a suspect, at this stage“ ….has made me wonder about the clarification statement “at this stage” why not just say “no” ???

I have no idea if it means anything or not??? But I did notice it in the presser…

I also got the feeling from the presser that someone “close to home” may be being looked at closely…. (But not necessarily MM)

IMO

“At this stage he is not (a suspect). Everyone in relation to Samantha is a person of interest. In our investigation we are speaking to everyone that was in her life.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/police-search-new-area-for-clues-in-samantha-murphy-disappearance/news-story/1732d04e62062b2133033ea34c4b767c

I must admit, the "at this stage," had me baffled too. Then he indicated about people in her life being a POI. I'm with Mr Toorak, giving Borce feeling.

 

[Oona]

This could be from the pattern of the GPS tracking and/or from an Apple watch health monitoring app (heart rate etc).

Yes agree. My Apple Watch detects if I’m walking outdoors, running, working out etc and all of this is logged on an app……and probably also stored on some sort of cloud.

 

[SouthAussie]

Not sure about VIC but in SA, being a Detective automatically confers powers of GSW. Interesting area, Search Warrants vs 'informed consent' and ultimately judiciary has powers to consider whether evidence may be admitted or not. Informed consent cannot comprise searching for one thing (eg a gun possibly used in a bank robbery) then oh looky looky what do we have here, the bloodstained knife used by Jack the Ripper would not fly. To use a far-fetched example.


(I edited state after Tishy edited the state in their post)

Yes, I looked up some Vic guidance on this ...

I get the impression Vic police don't have automatic powers for entry to search for a missing person without consent. Or a warrant.
Though there are about six other things they can search your property for, without a warrant or consent.

Can the police enter your house without a warrant in Victoria? - Furstenberg Law

In Victoria, police officers usually require a warrant to enter and search a private property. However, there are exceptions to this rule.

www.furstenberglaw.com.au

 

[Bats]

Please share

Ok then here are some...

Premeditated attack by someone...
- Someone completely random.
- or a known person. Etc....

Disgruntled employee

Completely accidental...then...

Known criminal 'gangs'. Could be various reasons here...
-not willing to co-operate.
-co-operated but other issues

Infidelity.... either side

Completely random assault (not premeditated)

Speculation doesn't help!
I find it easier to reverse engineer theories.

 

[Neet_Mc]

they said she travelled 7kms to get there

With or without the drink bottle? (I am glad the thread has moved past that moot point!)

 

[Deleted member 293720]

I will admit that Supt Hatt’s reply, “MM is not a suspect, at this stage“ ….has made me wonder about the clarification statement “at this stage” why not just say “no” ???

I have no idea if it means anything or not??? But I did notice it in the presser…

I also got the feeling from the presser that someone “close to home” may be being looked at closely…. (But not necessarily MM)

IMO

“At this stage he is not (a suspect). Everyone in relation to Samantha is a person of interest. In our investigation we are speaking to everyone that was in her life.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/police-search-new-area-for-clues-in-samantha-murphy-disappearance/news-story/1732d04e62062b2133033ea34c4b767c

Maybe a car used to transport her out of the bush, might be a customers' car at the workplace

 

[SLouTh]

Maybe a car used to transport her out of the bush, might be a customers' car at the workplace

I think there has been use of a vehicle … in this case … but not one from the workplace.. they advertise they have a fully lockable secure premises.. and as it was a Sunday, it would be locked up with security cameras I would imagine ..
JMO

 

[SouthAussie]

<RSBM>

“At this stage he is not (a suspect). Everyone in relation to Samantha is a person of interest. In our investigation we are speaking to everyone that was in her life.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/police-search-new-area-for-clues-in-samantha-murphy-disappearance/news-story/1732d04e62062b2133033ea34c4b767c

Yeah, I didn't like that either. All Mark Hatt had to say is "I can't comment on that" (about the whole POI subject).

I really, really, really don't want the children to have to go through that scenario.

But it could be that the police eyes are on a known-to-them suspect (not MM) and they don't want that suspect to know they have a clear person in mind .... yet. But they do want to shake them up a bit with uncertainty.

imo

 

[Neet_Mc]

I wonder if Samantha did any "hiring and firing" (particularly firing) at work?

As panel beaters, I’m curious whether their business has reported repairs that came to authorities because they were dodgy - dodgy either by way of trying to rip off insurance companies or because the cars that were ‘hot’. This scenario could lend itself to a kind of revenge Being sort against the business and/or owners.