Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat, 4 Feb 2024 *Arrest* #11

New Posts

BreakingNews said:
In the Toyah Cordingly murder, not a whole lot was released. Then police released a video of cars from a service station. I'm sure they only did that to give websleuthers something to talk about. We zoomed in and got to work analysing every car. Sometimes I think police should release footage just to see what we come up with. Might save them a lot of work.
Click to expand...
Don't don't don't discourage police from working. Work is good. When police work, we are so grateful.
 
BreakingNews said:
In the Toyah Cordingly murder, not a whole lot was released. Then police released a video of cars from a service station. I'm sure they only did that to give websleuthers something to talk about. We zoomed in and got to work analysing every car. Sometimes I think police should release footage just to see what we come up with. Might save them a lot of work.
Click to expand...
Lol That’s so funny because it’s spot on. I still want to know which car in the line up was Rajwinder Singh’s.
 
BreakingNews said:
In the Toyah Cordingly murder, not a whole lot was released. Then police released a video of cars from a service station. I'm sure they only did that to give websleuthers something to talk about. We zoomed in and got to work analysing every car. Sometimes I think police should release footage just to see what we come up with. Might save them a lot of work.
Click to expand...
I think I remember us back in the Baden-Clay days watching cars at a certain roundabout when police did a re-enactment one time?
 
JLZ said:
I'm sure. You can have a look at Google Maps including streetview and see what you think yourself, distances, angles, obstructions. It's also not a visitor taking snaps because nobody is that tall.

I'm a bit hung up on that photo too, only because of the claims that are made of it: that it's the very last picture of Sam and that it shows her leaving the property. But I'm a literalist. DM isn't written to be understood by people like me.
Click to expand...
I suspect you are being a touch too literal. I took it to mean it’s the last _good_ image of her, clipped from a video sequence showing her leaving the address.

Keeping in mind it was released for the purposes of IDing what was (at that time) a missing person search.
 
HoneyBunOne said:
I don't recall how many acres the Murphy property is, but where I live in Victoria - properties ranging from about 5 to 100's of acres - I don't see many people walking dogs, but they do have them.
Click to expand...
The inner suburbs of Ballarat reasonably built up - mostly quarter acre blocks. Not farms by any stretch.
 
marv hucker said:
why? It’s sub judice.
In australia cases are tried in courts. Evidence will be supplied to the court. Images will be supplied to the court. CCTV footage will be supplied to the court.

Stuff is only released to the public/media when there’s a need to gain the public’s assistance (ie “have you found…” or “did you see…” appeals) or when it’s a public safety announcement. In a well run case, only the absolute bare minimum will leak out.

The conspiracy theory stuff is a bit grating.
Click to expand...
As it should be- I am just surprised no member of the public has come forward to speak to the media. Everyone is so attention seeking now-a days.
 
Curiousobserver said:
As it should be- I am just surprised no member of the public has come forward to speak to the media. Everyone is so attention seeking now-a days.
Click to expand...

I think if a member of the public has come forward to speak to the media, the media won't print what they have to say. Because of sub judice. It is up to the media to honour sub judice.

But once the trial is over (if he goes to trial), we will hear all kinds of things. Because the media are then free to print all the info they have been gathering. Unless the court has permanently suppressed something.

imo
 
Last edited:
SouthAussie said:
I think if a member of the public has come forward to speak to the media, the media won't print what they have to say. Because of sub judice. It is up to the media to honour sub judice.

But once the trial is over (if he goes to trial), we will hear all kinds of things. Because the media are then free to print all the info they have been gathering. Unless the court has permanently suppressed something.

imo
Click to expand...
Makes more sense that the filter is the press- people usually want to insert themselves.
 
Curiousobserver said:
As it should be- I am just surprised no member of the public has come forward to speak to the media. Everyone is so attention seeking now-a days.
Click to expand...
But why are you “surprised” then?
Anyone who does know anything will have been briefed on what they can and can’t say. And the potential implications.
 
I keep coming back to what a police member who was part of the search prior to the phone being found said back in April or may I believe, he said to a family member he was concerned with all the mine shafts she may never be found he also said PS is the type offender who just doesn’t care he won’t reveal anything my family member mentioned Mother’s Day because Sam is a mum and he has a mum ect he said no he doesn’t care like he is just cold obviously he didn’t say why they searched areas but it seemed to me like they didn’t have a definitive reason to search otherwise i feel he would have been more confident in them eventually locating Sam sorry if I’m not allowed to post this
 
LozVic said:
I keep coming back to what a police member who was part of the search prior to the phone being found said back in April or may I believe, he said to a family member he was concerned with all the mine shafts she may never be found he also said PS is the type offender who just doesn’t care he won’t reveal anything my family member mentioned Mother’s Day because Sam is a mum and he has a mum ect he said no he doesn’t care like he is just cold obviously he didn’t say why they searched areas but it seemed to me like they didn’t have a definitive reason to search otherwise i feel he would have been more confident in them eventually locating Sam sorry if I’m not allowed to post this
Click to expand...
Like if he said we will definitely get him or find her I would feel differently
 
marv hucker said:
But why are you “surprised” then?
Anyone who does know anything will have been briefed on what they can and can’t say. And the potential implications.
Click to expand...
I am entitled to be surprised because that is not what would happen here in the US, even where there is a gag order. It's not too much work to leak with little chance of that leak being traced back. We often see cases in Canada, where they have the same restrictions, reported in US news where the law/restrictions does not apply. These leaks are usually from the defense and sometimes from families and friends who talk to US media.
 
Curiousobserver said:
I am entitled to be surprised because that is not what would happen here in the US, even where there is a gag order. It's not too much work to leak with little chance of that leak being traced back. We often see cases in Canada, where they have the same restrictions, reported in US news where the law/restrictions does not apply. These leaks are usually from the defense and sometimes from families and friends who talk to US media.
Click to expand...
It's a completely different system here. Sub judice is no joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 368 more.
Total: 1,783 (members: 369, guests: 1,414)

Online statistics

Members online
369
Guests online
1,414
Total visitors
1,783
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
597,647
Messages
18,068,539
Members
230,418
Latest member
bluntzilla901
Back
Top