Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat, 4 Feb 2024 *Arrest* #10

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
pavlovsdaughter said:
Depending on whether or not it’s written by someone with an understanding of the AU justice system it may be an error/oversight. I see that it’s AU Yahoo but not sure if that means it’s an actual AU version of the site with local reporters.

In the US at least we don’t have the system of barristers/solicitors, and we don’t have the “pool” of barristers that Trooper mentioned. (That’s probably not the right way to describe it, I’m just learning about it myself now thanks to Trooper.) In the US defense lawyers work either as public defenders or have a private practice, so if a defendant has a high profile attorney they are always hired, whereas a PD would be assigned.
Click to expand...
I’m learning as we go too thanks to everyone here, especially Trooper. Very much wishful thinking on my part as I understand the reasoning, but still don’t like the public purse being used to help vile humans. Also don’t like the idea of his parents paying for it either, but can’t see PS affording it alone. idk
 
Just to clear up what may be a slight confusion due to cultural gaps between different nation's legal practices..'

The USA, and it's Public Defenders'.. well... if Galbally has been assigned to S, he is now, in all respects, a Public Defender. It's all in the billing process. Every Barrister, in Victoria , and all the other states, there is no special pool, it's every one, be he/she be busy or not, is required to be , at the call of the Bar, a Public Defender.

About the closest thing to a Barrister in the USA would be what is referred to as a Trial Attorney, .. at a guess.

All Barristers, and solicitors ( translation USA 'attorney' ) are officers of the court, and come under the courts direction.

A Barrister has legal standing internationally, an AU barrister can present a case in Dubai, Hongkong, etc., a solicitor does not.,

That's why there is the roster, every judicial season ( the judicial year is divvied up into 'seasons', where by some judges go on the Circuit around Victoria's big regional towns, dispensing judgement, and often a bit of sarcasm and wit as well ) And every Barrister in Victoria is on the roster.

Then, when a case comes up for the Supreme Court, a lottery is run and who's name pops out , is ON. They then don their horsehair wig and they become The Public Defender, versus The Public Prosecutor.

Is this the right way to go about things? that the taxpayer funds all this hoohaa? well. yes, I guess it is, because otherwise only the wealthy, who do not often get arrested for anything would be the only people able to access legal assistance. So it works out fine, and has done for 120 years, and no one has any plans to change it. It serves the community well, and no credence is given to the idea that everyone must pay for their own defence. In an ideal world, that may work, but in reality it does not, hence, this system.

I believe all of the countries that use the Westminster system of judgement ( mostly British commonwealth or ex commonwealth) and that system requires it. I understand in Britain, at the moment, access to legal help is delayed due to underfunding , this is a situation to be avoided in AU and usually, ,in all the states and territories , it is of quite a high standard, all things considered. I groan at coughing up for S, ( although I am in another state I stlll contribute ) but I would not have it any other way.

An unrepresented accused at the bar is a dangerous precedent for everyone, as I see it.

Sorry, EDIT ) .... all of this is on the assumption that Stephenson cannot pay for his own defence.. Only his financial circumstances , not his parents, would be taken into consideration, not many 22 yr olds would have the money for it.

However, any Barrister can and mostly does operate in the privately funded sphere, often for business, where the fee is a tax deduction! ( sneaky, huh ? )
 
Last edited:
Rocket333 said:
Implies Galbally was hired by Stephenson and not assigned? I’m hoping so.

“It comes as solicitor Paul Galbally from Melbourne-based law firm Galbally O’Bryan has recently been hired by Patrick Orren Stephenson.”

Major update on Sam Murphy’s phone
Click to expand...
I am taking that 'been hired' with a bit of salt and pepper, .. it's a bit of lingua franca of newspaperspeak, as a descriptor, not as a claim of a fiscal contract....

just my perspective, though..
 
Trooper said:
Murder is an expensive pastime. Especially if you get caught. The thing about being charged with murder is, you have to have a barrister, to defend you in the Supreme Court. One has to take that expense into consideration. The more I think on it, the more I am convinced that we the good ole mug punter taxpayer is going to front up for this , and Galbally has been assigned by the court. As is all how it should be in a democratic society.

And in some ways, that is correct, because apparently, the evidence VICPOL has is outstandingly concise. Anything less than a Barrister, a KC , even, would be like taking a knife to a gunfight. Galbally somewhat evens out the playing field, so to speak.

To an experienced Barrister, no evidence is irrefutable. Never..

Is it worth it? He could plead guilty right now, nothing prevents him from doing that. He gets a discount on his sentence if he does that. Sometimes one can get about 7 to 8 years knocked off the time served before parole application. It's no small thing.

If he isn't guilty? Galbally would be like have Mohammed Ali in your corner, and Mike Tyson in the dressing shed. But the DPP has some super sharp barristers in their corner, too..
Click to expand...
Wow, I did not know about the ‘barrister’s pool’, so to speak. Where the court can assign a very expensive lawyer and tax payers foot the bill…fascinating, appreciate the insights!

Is there any chance that as part of legal strategy that PS could plead no guilty but waive his right to a magistrate’s committal hearing to go straight to the Supreme Court?

I only suggest this due to current Erin Patterson case (allegedly killed three people by serving them cooked beef Wellington with poisonous wild mushrooms, at lunch in her house in Victoria). I was flummoxed when the committal hearing was waived. Is this a potential strategy for when the police have mountains of irrefutable evidence, therefore lawyers decide it’s better to save everyone’s time (and potential argue for a reduced sentence, on that basis)…but still pleading not guilty at trial to ‘hedge one’s bets’ a bit? Would PS lawyers do that?
 
MrsAddick said:
Wow, I did not know about the ‘barrister’s pool’, so to speak. Where the court can assign a very expensive lawyer and tax payers foot the bill…fascinating, appreciate the insights!

Is there any chance that as part of legal strategy that PS could plead no guilty but waive his right to a magistrate’s committal hearing to go straight to the Supreme Court?

I only suggest this due to current Erin Patterson case (allegedly killed three people by serving them cooked beef Wellington with poisonous wild mushrooms, at lunch in her house in Victoria). I was flummoxed when the committal hearing was waived. Is this a potential strategy for when the police have mountains of irrefutable evidence, therefore lawyers decide it’s better to save everyone’s time (and potential argue for a reduced sentence, on that basis)…but still pleading not guilty at trial to ‘hedge one’s bets’ a bit? Would PS lawyers do that?
Click to expand...
If I can get this across first, when one is assigned a solicitor ( this is if your crime is of a certain gravity ) or , if your crime is of the highest gravity, eg murder, or treason , you get assigned a Barrister, it is a different process in some respects., let me explain.

If you pay for your barrrister, you call the shots, you are in charge, your barrister, after hearing his advice, takes your instructions. You decide on your plea, not guilty, guilty, etc.. you arrange the payment schedule, and all the fripperies associated with a huge cumbersome court case.

If you are deemed unable to secure your own barrister for a crime you are accused of, with such gravity as , say, murder, your position is somewhat different.

You are not in charge, for starters.

Your Barrister has to consult with various legal experts on the path to pursue your case, and has to justify all his/her expenses to a panel , and often you have to buckle under if the panel of experts tell you to plead a certain way. ( you can always complain to the Bar if you feel bundled )

Your case is run by the Barrister, your solicitor, and a few paralegals, with a lot of oversight by the Bar Association. It is not unusual for an assigned Barrister to advise his client to plead guilty. It is not common, but it is , also, not unusual.

A Barrister who is an assigned Legal rep has to jump thru hoops as well, it is not open slather on the public purse. lots of checks and balances. Things a barrister can do and cannot do, etc..

SO to your question, (a) . yes., and question (b) yes.,
 
So my search history now has:

1. Carabine knife

2. Is water better to hide a body

3. Can phones, in a toolbox pick up signals in a mine shaft

4. Is it hard to dig with just a shovel

5. What can a AFP tech dog sniff

etc etc.

I think I need to balance it out with - I don't know um - fluffy kittens???
 
nightrider17 said:
So my search history now has:

1. Carabine knife

2. Is water better to hide a body

3. Can phones, in a toolbox pick up signals in a mine shaft

4. Is it hard to dig with just a shovel

5. What can a AFP tech dog sniff

etc etc.

I think I need to balance it out with - I don't know um - fluffy kittens???
Click to expand...

Don't worry.
A top notch lawyer can rescue you.
Are you a billionaire?
No?
Ooops... :oops:
Ummm....:rolleyes:
 
Dotta said:
Absolutely!!!

There is only ONE suspect.

And his whole life (allegedly) led to this outcome:
MH problems, outbursts, addictions, DUI charges -

All described in MSM.

Let's not come up with elaborate theories and far fetched stories.

Reality is grim as it is.

JMO
Click to expand...
Many people have MH issues, outbursts, addictions, DUI charges, but don't murder!
 
Dotta said:
IMO
The TRUTH will always win.
Sooner or later.
Evidence and facts don't lie.

And it really does NOT matter if one pays with one's home for a top notch lawyer
or
reasonable fees for not so top notch one.

Either someone IS guilty or NOT guilty.
There is nothing relative about this simple truth.

JMO
Click to expand...
It is all about how things are presented in court. As a juror several times (once for murder) it is not about guilt or not. It is about the law. Some people are as guilty as ever, but as the law stands, not beyond reasonable doubt. Thankfully we were able to send the murderer on a long holiday in prison. The judge always advises jury panels on reasonable doubt and what can and can not be considered.
 
Trooper said:
Just to clear up what may be a slight confusion due to cultural gaps between different nation's legal practices..'

The USA, and it's Public Defenders'.. well... if Galbally has been assigned to S, he is now, in all respects, a Public Defender. It's all in the billing process. Every Barrister, in Victoria , and all the other states, there is no special pool, it's every one, be he/she be busy or not, is required to be , at the call of the Bar, a Public Defender.

About the closest thing to a Barrister in the USA would be what is referred to as a Trial Attorney, .. at a guess.

All Barristers, and solicitors ( translation USA 'attorney' ) are officers of the court, and come under the courts direction.

A Barrister has legal standing internationally, an AU barrister can present a case in Dubai, Hongkong, etc., a solicitor does not.,

That's why there is the roster, every judicial season ( the judicial year is divvied up into 'seasons', where by some judges go on the Circuit around Victoria's big regional towns, dispensing judgement, and often a bit of sarcasm and wit as well ) And every Barrister in Victoria is on the roster.

Then, when a case comes up for the Supreme Court, a lottery is run and who's name pops out , is ON. They then don their horsehair wig and they become The Public Defender, versus The Public Prosecutor.

Is this the right way to go about things? that the taxpayer funds all this hoohaa? well. yes, I guess it is, because otherwise only the wealthy, who do not often get arrested for anything would be the only people able to access legal assistance. So it works out fine, and has done for 120 years, and no one has any plans to change it. It serves the community well, and no credence is given to the idea that everyone must pay for their own defence. In an ideal world, that may work, but in reality it does not, hence, this system.

I believe all of the countries that use the Westminster system of judgement ( mostly British commonwealth or ex commonwealth) and that system requires it. I understand in Britain, at the moment, access to legal help is delayed due to underfunding , this is a situation to be avoided in AU and usually, ,in all the states and territories , it is of quite a high standard, all things considered. I groan at coughing up for S, ( although I am in another state I stlll contribute ) but I would not have it any other way.

An unrepresented accused at the bar is a dangerous precedent for everyone, as I see it.

Sorry, EDIT ) .... all of this is on the assumption that Stephenson cannot pay for his own defence.. Only his financial circumstances , not his parents, would be taken into consideration, not many 22 yr olds would have the money for it.

However, any Barrister can and mostly does operate in the privately funded sphere, often for business, where the fee is a tax deduction! ( sneaky, huh ? )
Click to expand...
Thanks Trooper, I'm Victorian and wasn't aware this is how it works. I assumed lawyers and barristers either put their hand up to be in the pool, or chose to work entirely in the public defence space, on the tax payers dollar. If PS was randomly assigned his barrister, he has indeed won the legal lottery, thus far at least.
nightrider17 said:
So my search history now has:

1. Carabine knife

2. Is water better to hide a body

3. Can phones, in a toolbox pick up signals in a mine shaft

4. Is it hard to dig with just a shovel

5. What can a AFP tech dog sniff

etc etc.

I think I need to balance it out with - I don't know um - fluffy kittens???
Click to expand...
Ha ha. I often wonder what my search history would suggest if my computer ever got seized and searched.

Maybe you can carefully sprinkle a few "best true crime shows", "amatuer sleuth forums" or "how do I become a detective" searches as defence that it was all just research and entertainment on your part.
 
BreakingNews said:
It is all about how things are presented in court. As a juror several times (once for murder) it is not about guilt or not. It is about the law. Some people are as guilty as ever, but as the law stands, not beyond reasonable doubt. Thankfully we were able to send the murderer on a long holiday in prison. The judge always advises jury panels on reasonable doubt and what can and can not be considered.
Click to expand...
If 'the truth always won' there would be no need for courts, or magistrates, or judges, or barristers or solicitors or even police, at all. One could claim ' truth' and that would be the end of it. La la land, really.
 
Rocket333 said:
I’m learning as we go too thanks to everyone here, especially Trooper. Very much wishful thinking on my part as I understand the reasoning, but still don’t like the public purse being used to help vile humans. Also don’t like the idea of his parents paying for it either, but can’t see PS affording it alone. idk
Click to expand...
It's the Australian system. Innocent until proven guilty. And everyone has a right to a fair trial.
 

Section 25 - Rights in criminal proceedings

Section 25 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) protects your rights if you are charged with a criminal offence.
www.humanrights.vic.gov.au www.humanrights.vic.gov.au

Rights in criminal proceedings​

Section 25 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities (the Charter) protects your rights if you are charged with a criminal offence. You have the right to be presumed innocent until you are proven guilty, law enforcement must inform you of the charges as quickly as possible, and you have the right to have a conviction and sentence reviewed. The Charter applies to public authorities in Victoria, such as state and local government departments and agencies, and people delivering services on behalf of the government.

If you do not have a lawyer or representative, you must be informed about whether legal aid is available to you. You can’t be made to testify against yourself or admit guilt for the criminal offence.

More on the page
 
Last edited:
BreakingNews said:
It's the Australian system. Innocent until proven guilty. And everyone has a right to a fair trial.
Click to expand...
One of the reasons why Australia does not have the death penalty in criminal matters ( it still has the death penalty on the books for treason , but it has never been exercised ) is 'truth' is a nebulous thing, in law.

The last time the death penalty was used , and it was in VIctoria, was in 1967 and the penalty was abolished in all states and territories in 1985... mainly because of one case that took place in Britain, back in the 1950's, where a young husband was executed for the murder of his wife, and baby, ,then it was found that the landlord of his tenement was busy killing other women as well as this mans wife. So.. a terrible , unfixable horrible death at the hands of the state had happened.

A case of truth most assuredly not winning in the case of Timothy Evans.

AU govts became increasingly uncomfortable about the whole business of state sanctioned death, since it was obvious that the justice system is not infallible. Which, they argued, it must be if people were to be executed in the name of the state. A clear case of recognising that sometimes 'truth' has fallen over, and actions taken cannot be reversed.

The death penalty for crime as a subject of debate often comes back up in Australian governance, but really, no AU Govt, Federal or State, is ever going to bring it back. Not in my lifetime, at least.
 
Last edited:
Rocket333 said:
I’m learning as we go too thanks to everyone here, especially Trooper. Very much wishful thinking on my part as I understand the reasoning, but still don’t like the public purse being used to help vile humans. Also don’t like the idea of his parents paying for it either, but can’t see PS affording it alone. idk
Click to expand...
The situation is, the alternative is equally as depressing, and possibly more expensive. It would result in a maximum correctional centre in every suburb, manned by large and cranky armed guards, who go home and scream at their own kids.

Without a professional defence, there really is no operative prosecution. If it's just the prosecution that has all the power and clout of the state backed institutions, which it does have, it is incumbent on the accused to have at the very least an equally qualified defence , there still is a major power imbalance, offset by the integrity of a jury and the judge.

There is nothing more time wasting and ultimately dangerous than an unrepresented defendant at the Bar. .. it is as dangerous for him/her as it is for me/ you, if you are an Australian. It would mean you are only a number at the mercy of the state, , a total reversal of 'In Forma Pauperis:' .... ( too poor to pay, too alive to dismiss ) ... The public purse is such a flexible, amorphous entity... Most Australians love it, actually, and take ownership of it. It could be me , tomorrow, is the main belief.,
 
HoneyBunOne said:
There appears to be 2 similarly named reserves in the Durham Lead/Buninyong area. Buninyong H21 Reserve, and Durham Lead Nature Conservation Reserve, which may also go by the name Durham Lead Bushland Reserve. This map shows them both in relation to each other:
www.google.com

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.com www.google.com

Durham Lead Bushland/Nature reserve is only 2.6 acres, but quite dense if the following video is in fact the bushland/nature reserve in question. I believe this was the park searched by police about 2 months ago, but I could be wrong.

Durham Lead Bushland Reserve

Discover the natural beauty of Durham Lead Bushland Reserve in Sulky, Australia, as you embark on a thrilling walking or hiking adventure. Spanning 2.6 acres, this picturesque park offers an ideal setting for outdoor enthusiasts seeking an immersive experience in nature. With a variety of...
www.mypacer.com www.mypacer.com
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=853917461477307

Buninyong H21 reserve covers 13.4 acres. There's not many photos online, the best shots are posted in news articles form that time. It appears to be bushland as well.

Buninyong H21 Bushland Reserve

Welcome to Buninyong H21 Bushland Reserve, nestled in the charming town of Buninyong, Australia. This 13.4-acre sanctuary offers a serene and picturesque ambiance, making it an ideal destination for walkers and hikers seeking a peaceful escape into nature. The park's lush greenery, diverse...
www.mypacer.com www.mypacer.com

Enfield State Park was also a search location around the same time. It's a 4400 hectare park, also south of the Mt Clear area.

Enfield State Park - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

I don't believe it has been searched (that we know about) but Enfield Plantation is on my radar too. This is a google street view of the terrain, date stamped with 2023 if I'm reading correctly.
www.google.com

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.com www.google.com

It's interesting to note that both Buninyong/Durham Lead reserves are not far from the corner of Buninyong-Mt Mercer Road and Slaughterhouse Road, roughly where the phone was found. The Enfield Plantation and State Park are further south. All 4 of these reserves/state parks are open 24/7. The furthest location from Scotsburn or Mt Clear is the Enfield State Park, at approximately 30 minutes travel time, or 1 hour round trip.

Just some observations and thoughts of mine.
Click to expand...
We need a name for this whole wooded area.
1717555008256.png
www.google.com

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.com www.google.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 125 more.
Total: 2,020 (members: 126, guests: 1,894)

Online statistics

Members online
126
Guests online
1,894
Total visitors
2,020
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,728
Messages
18,098,743
Members
230,917
Latest member
CP95
Back
Top