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

[UnfoldingTruth]

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.

I did not say that at all. (I am actually sorry I even opened my mouth). But Police DO withhold information if it is detrimental to the investigation to release it or for whatever other reason necessary. I did not say they were doing it. And I did not say that I know for fact there was a weapon, Just like so many other posters have posted their opinion on. But I also don't think others know for a fact the other way either. That is simply my point and will leave it there.

 

[GutFeeling!]

I did not say that at all. (I am actually sorry I even opened my mouth). But Police DO withhold information if it is detrimental to the investigation to release it or for whatever other reason necessary. I did not say they were doing it. And I did not say that I know for fact there was a weapon, Just like so many other posters have posted there opinion on. But i also don't think other know for fact the other way either. that is simply my point and will leave it there.

Gotcha Sorry I misunderstood :cheers:

 

[marlywings]

Jillian MEAGHER
Tribute
This Guest Book will remain online permanently

http://tributes.heraldsun.com.au/ob...x?n=jillian-meagher&pid=160148041#fbLoggedOut

 

[GutFeeling!]

Interesting read on what the police have to prove for Murder in Victoria

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

 

[Blue Bottle]

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

I've noticed that, "interfering with a corpse", is an expression used mainly in QLD when a body is moved and have seen it used there many times.

However, it doesn't seem to be used much (if ever), when it comes to the other States of Australia.

?

 

[DrWatson]

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.

No offence taken, UT - we're all entitled to our opinions and interpretations

I just thought that the still frame I posted shows his hand not holding anything, so unless he's very adept at sleight of hand, then half an arm-swing before that he wouldn't have been holding anything either.

But - let's leave it there. Time, hopefully, will tell which of us is right about a weapon or lack of one. And I repeat - no offence taken at all :twocents:

 

[moreinfo]

May I just say, at the risk of sounding like a bit of a wet blanket, that there seems to be an increasing amount of guesswork being posted.....

Speculation and guesswork are somewhat counterproductive. Logic and deduction based on facts or at least information that has been verified would seem to be more helpful.

Now I know I've posted my own theories as to what may have happened, but they were based pretty much on what we know and what was on the CCTV. <modsnip>

But all this talk of guns, knives, etc I think is getting into the realms of the fanciful. As others have posted, I really don't think the police would have released the CCTV footage if it showed Jill being held at gunpoint, and I am sure she would not have walked in his direction if he was threatening her with a knife. That would NOT be a natural thing to do. As I said - to threaten somebody with a knife, you have to be right with them within striking distance.

I've also had another look at the picture from the Facebook page (yup, it seems many of us grabbed a copy while we could) and while I'm not sure just what that little brown object actually is, I'd put my house on the fact that it is NOT a knife...

OK - I'll shut up and go to bed. Early start in the morning :seeya:

I get your point. But having everyones own thoughts and views bounce around may help piece together the puzzle when more info is revealed. Everyone thinks and picks up different things. I dont mind reading what people may be thinking in their head. just my opinion again.

 

[GutFeeling!]

I've noticed that, "interfering with a corpse", is an expression used mainly in QLD when a body is moved and have seen it used there many times.

However, it doesn't seem to be used much (if ever), when it comes to the other States of Australia.

?

There is a law against it in Victoria, and that is the offense name. I posted this link earlier: http://www.adla.com.au/web/page/vic_interfere_with_corpse_of_a_human_being

 

[catswhiskers]

With pleasure Poss lol

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

I didn't see that story when it was originally broadcast - Hamish is obviously quietly stricken and shocked but did a good job really. He pretty well summed up the information that we have now - I mean two weeks later, we don't really know much more than he sadly presented that evening.

 

[Blue Bottle]

There is a law against it in Victoria, and that is the offense name. I posted this link earlier: http://www.adla.com.au/web/page/vic_interfere_with_corpse_of_a_human_being

Thanks.

Arhhh.... I wasn't clear enough in what I was meaning. In other parts of Australia the meaning of that expression is more in line to this (from the link you posted)...

34B. Offence to interfere with corpse of a human being

(1) A person must not intentionally-

(a) interfere sexually or commit an indecent act with a corpse of a human being; or

(b) unlawfully remove body parts from a corpse of a human being-



However, in Queensland, I notice it is a term which seems to have an additional meaning where a body is moved from one location to another. It's a term I have seen used recently in quite a number of Queensland murder cases when the murder is committed in one place but the body moved and found in another place.

 

[Makara]

I did not say that at all. (I am actually sorry I even opened my mouth). But Police DO withhold information if it is detrimental to the investigation to release it or for whatever other reason necessary. I did not say they were doing it. And I did not say that I know for fact there was a weapon, Just like so many other posters have posted their opinion on. But I also don't think others know for a fact the other way either. That is simply my point and will leave it there.

Hey UT, good to see you back with us. I can see what you're referring to in the shot of AB heading southbound. It certainly does look like he has something in his right hand. I've grabbed some screencaps from the video and IMO he doesn't have anything in his right hand at that stage.

In the first screencap below you'll see that the time at the bottom of the footage is 1:41:28 and as I said, it certainly does look like AB is holding something in his right hand. The second screencap below is captured one second later at 1:41:29 as is the third screencap. You can see that AB doesn't have anything in his right hand. These three screencaps are within the space of one second according to the time on the bottom of the footage. We don't see him drop anything or put his hand in his pocket.

When I'm wanting to get screencaps from a video, I pause the video and then look at it frame by frame by using the time slider at the bottom of the video. There are usually two to three frames per second. It is slow and painstaking but sometimes it's amazing what is revealed.

1:41:28


1:41:29


1:41:29

 

[Love Coco]

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

I hope it will be new info. Whoever watches please let us know.

 

[Amee]

IMO the screencap that The Observer posted clearly showed he had something in his hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qywc5F_xWi0

 

[Curiousasacat]

Sad day.

RIP Jill.

 

[Makara]

IMO the screencap that The Observer posted clearly showed he had something in his hand.

I agree Amee. IMO it is a gun or as Fuskier said, numchucks. It is definitely something solid and is not a jpg artifact. Artifacts can be easily removed in Photoshop and other image editing software. What really stands out for me is Jill's hands when AB gestures with the, I'll call it a weapon. She has both hands raised in front of her in a defensive manner. I'm doing some more screencaps now and will post them soon.

MOO.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

No offence taken, UT - we're all entitled to our opinions and interpretations

I just thought that the still frame I posted shows his hand not holding anything, so unless he's very adept at sleight of hand, then half an arm-swing before that he wouldn't have been holding anything either.

But - let's leave it there. Time, hopefully, will tell which of us is right about a weapon or lack of one. And I repeat - no offence taken at all :twocents:

Thats ok. I do disagree in terms of what I saw. I did replay the footage over and over when the footage came out, and kept pausing it in a particular spot. I wasn't looking for a weapon, it was his mannerism in the way he walked back down towards where Jill must have been. It was only then I noticed it and you are right it was not for the whole moment of him walking past the boutique that I saw it. I had to be very precise at exactly where I did stop it and saw whatever it was.

But in honesty I don't care who is right or who is wrong. It matters not. The most important thing is this person is prosecuted for this crime and is made to serve the full term of imprisonment for the barbaric and horrific crime he committed on Jill that cut her beautiful life short in the most horrific of ways.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

Hey UT, good to see you back with us. I can see what you're referring to in the shot of AB heading southbound. It certainly does look like he has something in his right hand. I've grabbed some screencaps from the video and IMO he doesn't have anything in his right hand at that stage.

In the first screencap below you'll see that the time at the bottom of the footage is 1:41:28 and as I said, it certainly does look like AB is holding something in his right hand. The second screencap below is captured one second later at 1:41:29 as is the third screencap. You can see that AB doesn't have anything in his right hand. These three screencaps are within the space of one second according to the time on the bottom of the footage. We don't see him drop anything or put his hand in his pocket.

When I'm wanting to get screencaps from a video, I pause the video and then look at it frame by frame by using the time slider at the bottom of the video. There are usually two to three frames per second. It is slow and painstaking but sometimes it's amazing what is revealed.

1:41:28
View attachment 27150

1:41:29
View attachment 27151

1:41:29
View attachment 27152

hello Makara!

yes thanks for those screen shots. that first one is part of where I kept replaying the footage. I do think there is something there. The other 2, one of which Dr Watson posted, does not show the 'something'. It was not visible for the whole time he walked past that shop.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

I agree Amee. IMO it is a gun or as Fuskier said, numchucks. It is definitely something solid and is not a jpg artifact. Artifacts can be easily removed in Photoshop and other image editing software. What really stands out for me is Jill's hands when AB gestures with the, I'll call it a weapon. She has both hands raised in front of her in a defensive manner. I'm doing some more screencaps now and will post them soon.

MOO.

think it was me who mentioned numchucks, the still vision that was posted by someone last night made me come to that thought. Not saying for certain it is, but looked to me like it could fit with what I saw. Combined with the nurses story about being approached by a guy in a laneway of Hope st, and he said to her he would kill her with his nunchucks(or something to that effect). Of curse its all theory and supposition. but could fit a pattern.

 

[Makara]

think it was me who mentioned numchucks, the still vision that was posted by someone last night made me come to that thought. Not saying for certain it is, but looked to me like it could fit with what I saw. Combined with the nurses story about being approached by a guy in a laneway of Hope st, and he said to her he would kill her with his nunchucks(or something to that effect). Of curse its all theory and supposition. but could fit a pattern.

BBM.

Sorry, my mistake. It's just that you look so much alike. :floorlaugh:

 

[Berry]

Australia's attorneys-general will set up a working group to look at the influence of social media sites on a person's right to a fair trial.

The murder of the Melbourne woman Jill Meagher has brought into sharp focus the issue of social media's potential influence on criminal trials...

see more at link



http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8543318