GUILTY Australia - Jill Meagher, 29, Melbourne, 22 Sep 2012 #4

[Fuskier]

October 05, 2012 10:23AM

MOURNERS have arrived at Melbourne's Fawkner Memorial Park in buses for the funeral of slain ABC radio employee Jill Meagher.
Dressed almost exclusively in black, close family and friends of the 29-year-old lined up to sign a guest book on Friday morning before entering the chapel where they will say their final farewell to the Irish national
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ell-jill-meagher/story-e6freono-1226489001967

Excerpt from the above link: '...Homicide squad detectives who investigated Ms Meagher's disappearance joined family and friends at Friday's service...'. I feel relieved to know that the Detectives, men and women Police officers involved in her investigation/body recovery had the opportunity to share their sorrow and grieve for they have witnessed the unfolding of this tragic event first hand. They stand in solidarity with the grieving family and their empathy for these tragic events would also provide some comfort to family and friends. IMO :candle:

 

[possumheart]

FYI Nine news is advertising 'what really happened to JM' tonight at six. I don't know if it is in all states.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=S3sRq_0A1Z4

 

[possumheart]

http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/breaking-news-blog/jill-meagher-to-be-laid-to-rest/20121005-273eh.html
Twenty-nine doves have been released to mark each year of the life of Jill Meagher at a private funeral for the Irish woman who is alleged to have been murdered two weeks ago.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

OK - I take the point from several people that the guesswork and hypotheses are a form of catharsis. Fair enough.

But just on the point raised that the "weapon" may have been nunchucks - if you read that article about the nurse who was accosted, it doesn't actually say that he HAD nunchucks. What it says is that he told her that he would strangle her with nunchucks, while he was pulling at and smoothing out his leather gloves. Bit hard to do that with nunchucks in your hands too. So I don't think that we have evidence that he ever actually HAD any nunchucks. I could be wrong, but I don't recall that article saying that the nurse actually SAW the nunchucks.

Personally, I'm still going with the thought that no weapon was involved in getting Jill to walk the same way and then to grab her. But we don't know if it was just smooth talking, or if she looked around the corner and really thought that he'd gone - after he'd ducked into that laneway.

But if AB had suggested she was being followed by somebody sinister and that he was trustworthy enough to make sure she was OK as she only lived around the corner, then that could have worked.... "Just follow me and I'll lead the way to make sure you're safe..."

Hopefully, the "How did he get her to walk that way" question will be answered - eventually.

No it did not say he actually did. But therefore we don't know he did not either. I was not there and I do not Know for certain. I am simply putting forward my thoughts on it just as others have done too. (The fact I don't think you know for fact it was 'artifact' on the tape either and what I am referring to certainly does not appear to be that. I thought it was something from when the footage was first released.) The fact he has said that he had them and the nature of the incident *could* point to this being a previous attempt by the accused. It is often the case that murders such as these start with other incidents and escalate to murder. I am not saying it did. But I think given the incident that the nurse spoke of and that she said AB matched the description, and also the other attempted abduction reports and rapes, that there is the likelihood that there is/was a man- possibly AB responsible for a number of these similar attacks.

As for the someone is following you theory, that is also a possibility. I keep thinking what would I do? Its hard when you are not in the situation(and I am not in anyway judging Jill if she did follow him in this situation). I am not sure I would follow a stranger (male) if they said someone was following me, and to come with them. I think I would be extremely suspicious and on guard, and probably look for the best possible escape route from both situations(someone following and going with this person). So without knowing Jill, we don't know she would just willingly follow someone in that situation either. Perhaps he did try this and she did not comply so then he applied force or threatened?

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

Well there is a turkish restaurant nearby ... :winkaway:

I am on the fringing/artefact side of the fence here - it distorts everything IMO, and the zoomed in shots that have been posted just exaggerate it even more. He could have been holding a cigarette for all we know - that could account for what kind of looks like a pistol grip there and the casual way he seems to be waving Jill on as well. She just doesn't seem to be reacting like someone who has been confronted with a weapon of any sort.

I agree with perthite here:



There is only so much to be gleaned or surmised from that one piece of cctv footage until more info is released by the police.

Yes, but what I am talking of when AB was walking south, before walking back with Jill in the picture, I do not believe can be dismissed as artefact. I replayed and pause this video so many times when I first saw it as I could see something, but could not work it out. I did not know how to save the vido so I could zoom in. Even the way he was walking in that shot, was different, and looked as though he was holding something. I do believe he did have something from those shots. I don't really think it was a gun, though I do see in the later shots how people would think it may be a gun, It could be seen as that, but I don't think it is.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

He may have even had a phone in his hand but I'll stick by my earlier post & say police would not have released that footage or they would have edited it out if it had shown the accused was holding some type of weapon...it would have been far too distressing for Jill's husband & family to watch.

Hi Marlywings..congratulations(albeit a bit late) on your elevation to mod status.

I understand what you are saying there. And I would assume the police had all their best techies on that footage. But How do we know they did not notice something also. I do not mean a gun. BUt I do believe he had something there, based on what I saw in the earlier shots, it wasn't a phone. Maybe they thought it would not be noticed by the public and chose to release the footage anyway, for the sake of the investigation. (maybe they did not see it either- though I do doubt that). I don't think it was a gun. I think something like that would be known about and they would have said this footage shows the offender waving a gun around or threatening JIll.

MOO

thanks for the post/updates about the service today. Given the day. I think I shall remain quiet in respect and not post anymore at the moment.

 

[GutFeeling!]

Excerpt from the above link: '...Homicide squad detectives who investigated Ms Meagher's disappearance joined family and friends at Friday's service...'. I feel relieved to know that the Detectives, men and women Police officers involved in her investigation/body recovery had the opportunity to share their sorrow and grieve for they have witnessed the unfolding of this tragic event first hand. They stand in solidarity with the grieving family and their empathy for these tragic events would also provide some comfort to family and friends. IMO :candle:

That is very common, I have been to a lot of funerals for stories I have covered and there is always a police presence. In my job you can get close to people quickly, you're in their lives at the worst possible times - the police would get even closer even quicker.

 

[GutFeeling!]

Hi Marlywings..congratulations(albeit a bit late) on your elevation to mod status.

I understand what you are saying there. And I would assume the police had all their best techies on that footage. But How do we know they did not notice something also. I do not mean a gun. BUt I do believe he had something there, based on what I saw in the earlier shots, it wasn't a phone. Maybe they thought it would not be noticed by the public and chose to release the footage anyway, for the sake of the investigation. (maybe they did not see it either- though I do doubt that). I don't think it was a gun. I think something like that would be known about and they would have said this footage shows the offender waving a gun around or threatening JIll.

MOO

thanks for the post/updates about the service today. Given the day. I think I shall remain quiet in respect and not post anymore at the moment.

BBM: that's my point, police wouldn't release it hoping that the public wouldn't see it. If they thought it was a weapon but that we wouldn't notice then the only other person that would know about a weapon is AB, and that could have sent him into a panic and harmed her IF she was still alive. While police thought she wasn't alive they would have erred on the side of caution and not risked him panicking and maybe harming someone else.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

BBM: that's my point, police wouldn't release it hoping that the public wouldn't see it. If they thought it was a weapon but that we wouldn't notice then the only other person that would know about a weapon is AB, and that could have sent him into a panic and harmed her IF she was still alive. While police thought she wasn't alive they would have erred on the side of caution and not risked him panicking and maybe harming someone else.

I understand what you are saying there. I do Believe what I am seeing. And I am not talking about the footage that has been said to be a gun waving around(I don't believe that). But perhaps they thought whatever it was would not be dicernable to the public eye. (Perhaps they did not see it at first either, though as I said I think they would have scoured the footage). Its all just MOO and I understand what you are saying there.

 

[DrWatson]

Yes, but what I am talking of when AB was walking south, before walking back with Jill in the picture, I do not believe can be dismissed as artefact. I replayed and pause this video so many times when I first saw it as I could see something, but could not work it out. I did not know how to save the vido so I could zoom in. Even the way he was walking in that shot, was different, and looked as though he was holding something. I do believe he did have something from those shots. I don't really think it was a gun, though I do see in the later shots how people would think it may be a gun, It could be seen as that, but I don't think it is.

I appreciate the point you're making UT. But I've just watched that CCTV footage again, frame by frame around that point. And there is NO WEAPON...

The black "object" you refer to in his hand is the fringing artefact, while the black mark on the leg of his jeans is the shadow of the fold in his jeans. The next frame shows a similar fold shadow on his front leg. And the frame at 1'49"29 shows both jeans shadows fading as he walks across the lit window, and it also clearly shows his right hand on a forward arm-swing with nothing in it.

There is no gun, no knife, no nunchucks, no nothing. It is just him walking, with his right side towards the lit shop window and the CCTV.

And here is something that is from this morning's news - not directly referring to the JM case, and oh how this could have ended so differently:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ping-torture-and-stalking-20121005-273co.html

But - notice the charges, including "going armed to cause fear"

I am sure that if AB had been carrying any sort of weapon, then that would also have been included in the list of charges he is facing so far.

 

[possumheart]

But - notice the charges, including "going armed to cause fear"

I am sure that if AB had been carrying any sort of weapon, then that would also have been included in the list of charges he is facing so far.

And notice no charge of "interfering with a corpse" when it is clearly stated that she died in Brunswick and was buried elsewhere.

I see something in the hand and I am very familiar with compression artifacts in images doc. There is motion involved as well compression artifacts. My interpretation relies heavily on his body language as well.

 

[GutFeeling!]

And notice no charge of "interfering with a corpse" when it is clearly stated that she died in Brunswick and was buried elsewhere.

I see something in the hand and I am very familiar with compression artifacts in images doc. There is motion involved as well compression artifacts. My interpretation relies heavily on his body language.

http://www.adla.com.au/web/page/vic_interfere_with_corpse_of_a_human_being

Maybe he didn't according to the actual law on the site above. (Didn't copy a piece of it because it really is the whole thing and we have that 10 percent of a story maximum for copyright laws) And is it interfering if it happened in the car?

Or maybe he has been and it hasn't been made public yet, remember they only charged him with abduction initially so they could detain him.

There will be a lot more charges, but something like using a weapon for fear would have been early imo

The investigation has not stopped yet, thus the searches

 

[Amee]

Police earlier confirmed more than 130 calls to Crime Stoppers had been received and detectives had “collected extensive CCTV from the area” which is “being thoroughly reviewed.”

Victoria Police released several minutes of footage today,

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/tr...before-vanishing/story-fnat7jnn-1226479708333

There was talk of much more closed circuit television footage from several shops along Sydney Road that had been collected by police in the last few days. So they're pretty sure that they've solved this case.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3599655.htm

 

[GutFeeling!]

Police earlier confirmed more than 130 calls to Crime Stoppers had been received and detectives had “collected extensive CCTV from the area” which is “being thoroughly reviewed.”

Victoria Police released several minutes of footage today,

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/tr...before-vanishing/story-fnat7jnn-1226479708333

I must have missed something (again - it is a habit lol) That link only shows me the original footage released but they are blocked now.

 

[GutFeeling!]

In the ABC footage, Hamish's face says a whole lot about what happened in that press conference imo

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3599655.htm

 

[possumheart]

In the ABC footage, Hamish's face says a whole lot about what happened in that press conference imo

Can you provide a link Gutsy?

 

[GutFeeling!]

Can you provide a link Gutsy?

With pleasure Poss lol

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3599655.htm

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

I appreciate the point you're making UT. But I've just watched that CCTV footage again, frame by frame around that point. And there is NO WEAPON...

The black "object" you refer to in his hand is the fringing artefact, while the black mark on the leg of his jeans is the shadow of the fold in his jeans. The next frame shows a similar fold shadow on his front leg. And the frame at 1'49"29 shows both jeans shadows fading as he walks across the lit window, and it also clearly shows his right hand on a forward arm-swing with nothing in it.

There is no gun, no knife, no nunchucks, no nothing. It is just him walking, with his right side towards the lit shop window and the CCTV.

And here is something that is from this morning's news - not directly referring to the JM case, and oh how this could have ended so differently:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ping-torture-and-stalking-20121005-273co.html

But - notice the charges, including "going armed to cause fear"

I am sure that if AB had been carrying any sort of weapon, then that would also have been included in the list of charges he is facing so far.

NO offence, but I don't believe you know that there is NO WEAPON. Just as I don't know for sure there IS a WEAPON. You are looking at footage and so am I we are perhaps seeing different things or interpreting different things in the same images. While I do believe I saw something, not just shadow(please give me some credit)- what I saw was NOT shadow, it did not transfer to the front leg. Sorry. (It was something I noticed a week or more ago, I am not just jumping on the bandwagon). And what I was looking at last night was the still image, not this video. As far as I am concerned you do NOT know what you are seeing is artefact or that there was NO weapon. Just as I don't know that there was. We can only interpret as we see them. (And ultimately it is up to the Police to decide this or to investigate this. They are the ones I guess in the end who will know or find this out).

I will also add the picture you posted with the shadow, that I can see, is not the image I was referring to , and the shadow is NOT what I was referring to.

 

[Amee]

I must have missed something (again - it is a habit lol) That link only shows me the original footage released but they are blocked now.

I didnt post the link for the footage. I was simply pointing out of all the CCTV footage the Vic Police have they have only released a few mins of it.

 

[GutFeeling!]

Unfolding? Why do you think the police would with hold the fact that he had a weapon and yet go into detail of the crimes he has been charged with ? To me, that just doesn't make sense.