GUILTY Australia - Jill Meagher, 29, Melbourne, 22 Sep 2012 #5

[Jmbr]

One thing I picked up on.. He returned at 4.22am. So precise with the time... Clearly they have him on CCTV coming back, otherwise it would say between 4.20 and 4.30 he returned.

He may have done something with her while she was dead, but would he be charged with interfering with a corpse? I really hope she wasn't still alive and dying while he left and he came back and finished her off... Far out.

They've released a lot of information. I don't know how detectives do it. They have been so amazing during this. I would've killed him if I was sitting across and hearing that only to have him then deny murder.

Oh thanks SSS hadn't seen that article on lane way footage.

 

[SSS]

.

Oh thanks SSS hadn't seen that article on lane way footage.

I'm pretty sure the footage was captured by a camera at the Ovens St end of the laneway. I posted a pic in one of the earlier threads of what looked like a camera mounted on the side of the building at 34-36 Ovens St.

It could easily have captured a vehicle entering and leaving the L-shaped laneway.

 

[keyleigh]

Oh geez. that footage.

The police seem to be giving him the finger tonight, don't they? Good on them, they have so much evidence against him.

 

[Angeline]

I'm also wondering if she really was saying "get out of here". No disrespect intended, but English is not the first language of the witnesses and with Jill Irish accent, it could well have been something else.

There are so many "if onlys" to this story. It breaks my heart.

That's what I thought too, that they misunderstood the words. It's a strange thing to overhear. The news also mentioned they heard a door slam, but didn't sound like a car door. It said they didn't hear anything else, like screaming. I thought surely it must've been a neighbour that they heard, but the timing and location are just too coincidental, and obviously the prosecution believes their evidence is relevant.

 

[Alli1982]

it makes me angry that he has obviously consented to the police interview being released as he is painting himself as a remorseful character who was trying to 'help' Jill, before it 'went wrong' and he doesn't do well when he is hurt by people - yet someone has stopped the details about the cold facts in relation to rape. I don't particularly want to read about it, and most importantly, I'm sure her family don't want it published everywhere, but the way he has been portrayed, and the fact he has even been consulted about what was to be released is certainty skewed to date.

 

[Angeline]

Oh please, according to The Age he told police he was crying when he buried her, and crying as he was telling them about it. It's well documented that this monster knows every trick in the book - he thinks showing fake remorse is gonna help him? He thinks this will fool anyone?

 

[Alli1982]

Oh please, according to The Age he told police he was crying when he buried her, and crying as he was telling them about it. It's well documented that this monster knows every trick in the book - he thinks showing fake remorse is gonna help him? He thinks this will fool anyone?

my point was he has far to much power to even be able to portray himself in this way - of course everyone knows it's crap but he shouldn't get opportunity to play his tricks.

 

[ozazure]

He doesn't have two brain cells to rub together, his legal representatives are deciding how he pleas, what is consented to he released ... He is no manipulating mastermind.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

One thing I picked up on.. He returned at 4.22am. So precise with the time... Clearly they have him on CCTV coming back, otherwise it would say between 4.20 and 4.30 he returned.

He may have done something with her while she was dead, but would he be charged with interfering with a corpse? I really hope she wasn't still alive and dying while he left and he came back and finished her off... Far out.

They've released a lot of information. I don't know how detectives do it. They have been so amazing during this. I would've killed him if I was sitting across and hearing that only to have him then deny murder.

Oh thanks SSS hadn't seen that article on lane way footage.

bolded by me.. something along those lines is my train of thought..It would fit with something being so distressing etc, as has been reported.

 

[fruity]

bolded by me.. something along those lines is my train of thought..It would fit with something being so distressing etc, as has been reported.

From the reports I don't think this is the case. It sounds fairly clear that he strangled/killed her then left her body in the lane while he went to get the shovel. It's true that he could have killed her after he came back, but I'm hoping that's not the case.

''At 1.38am the accused accosted the deceased,'' Mr Silbert told the court.

''He has then proceeded to drag her into a laneway...where he has raped her and strangled her.''

It is alleged Mr Bayley raped Meagher three times.

Mr Silbert said he had then killed her to ensure there were no witnesses.

Mr Silbert said Mr Bayley left Meagher's body in the laneway, and went to his Coburg home to fetch a shovel.

At 4.22am he arrived back at the laneway, Mr Silbert said, and put the body in the boot of his car.

At 4.26am he drove to Gisborne South where he buried the body on the side of the road.

Going back to the use of 'accosted', I think the news reports misinterpreted it when they reported that he 'grabbed' her at 1.38am. From what I can tell, he approached her at 1.38am then dragged her into the laneway around 1.44 or 1.45am.

Just to be sure, I looked up the definition of 'accost'.

Verb
Approach and address (someone) boldly or aggressively.
Approach (someone) with hostility or harmful intent.
Synonyms
address - approach

Edited to add: if he interfered with her corpse he would definitely have been charged with it. Victorian law is here:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ca195882/s34b.html

 

[Scoobysnack]

He doesn't have two brain cells to rub together, his legal representatives are deciding how he pleas, what is consented to he released ... He is no manipulating mastermind.

He 'thinks' he is..... He did once openly admit to telling the parol board what they wanted to hear.

 

[Scoobysnack]

Also Jill's phone.... AB said he smashed it, this would have been after he buried her?
I think I read somewhere that a mobile carrier had something to do with the investigation, they traced Jill's phone.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

From the reports I don't think this is the case. It sounds fairly clear that he strangled/killed her then left her body in the lane while he went to get the shovel. It's true that he could have killed her after he came back, but I'm hoping that's not the case.



Going back to the use of 'accosted', I think the news reports misinterpreted it when they reported that he 'grabbed' her at 1.38am. From what I can tell, he approached her at 1.38am then dragged her into the laneway around 1.44 or 1.45am.

Just to be sure, I looked up the definition of 'accost'.


Edited to add: if he interfered with her corpse he would definitely have been charged with it. Victorian law is here:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ca195882/s34b.html

Thanks.. yeah, I didn't mean he came back and killed her.. I meant came back and interferred with her body- after she was already dead.. before taking her and burying her. Not nice thoughts at all..

 

[Paulie11]

Were the public free to enter court today to listen to the hearing to hear facts which have been suppressed? I did not hear it was a closed hearing, so I presume any member of the public could walk in and listen. Is that correct?
<modsnip>

Over at the Victoria Police website: http://www.vicpolicenews.com.au/ all we find is this:
Police investigate kangaroo shootings - Upper Plenty
Tuesday, 12 March 2013 21:10
Police have charged a man as part of an ongoing investigation into an animal cruelty incident in Upper Plenty last week.

This is a farce. The police should be updating us about cases like this, <modsnip>

Does anyone know the protocols for going about seeking information on cases such as this? Has anyone had any experience? What has that experience been like? Good or bad? I want to know who has access to information.

I want to know whether the police are just making up these charges of oral, anal, vaginal rape (3 rape charges)- in order to get him a higher sentence because of the greater degradation of his offending. If he&#8217;s denying it, then what evidence do the cops have to bring those charges? Something we can&#8217;t know, I suppose; we, the gullible many. So if evidence was provided, the papers and those in court all know, now bound by secrecy, and we&#8217;re getting some dribs and drabs. Screw this. If the laws need to be changed, then they should. Police should not go fishing around for charges to game the broken system. Fix the system, not the charges.

Cap in hand, we go begging for information. Off to the profiteers we go.

 

[CuriousGrace]

This whole case still sends shivers down my spine and the New CCTV footage is chilling.

Her family are so strong. I'm so amazed at the strength of her whole family and they have displayed such a united front. They truly look like such wonderful people, I sincerely feel so sorry for what they have been put through and my Lord, poor Jill. My heart breaks for her. She will NEVER be forgotten.

I am very interested to know what he was actually doing before he returned to the scene to collect the body. He just left her there for an hour or so? And how long was the duration of the attack? I am shocked no one heard more commotion.

 

[Paulie11]

Forensic pathologist Dr Matthew Lynch told the court Ms Meagher was found lying clothed on her side. He said a post-mortem examination found extensive bruising on her neck which suggested a protracted struggle as she was strangled.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3714069.htm

also from the same report:
At 4.22 am, CCTV footage in the laneway shows a car pulling in. A few minutes later, it's seen leaving.

they also breifly showed some footage of this car coming and going. I haven't managed to see it online anywhere.

 

[Paulie11]

This whole case still sends shivers down my spine and the New CCTV footage is chilling.

I am very interested to know what he was actually doing before he returned to the scene to collect the body. He just left her there for an hour or so? And how long was the duration of the attack? I am shocked no one heard more commotion.

i think it is possible the two witnesses were coached in what to say- not exactly lying, though selective evidence to spare the family more shocking details- as the cops have enough to convict him, so they see no need into going into every syllable of what was vocalised; and also to, in a way, absolve them of social immorality by not reporting what they heard immediately. Read between the lines to hear what i am saying on that last point.

 

[Paulie11]

it makes me angry that he has obviously consented to the police interview being released as he is painting himself as a remorseful character who was trying to 'help' Jill, before it 'went wrong' and he doesn't do well when he is hurt by people - yet someone has stopped the details about the cold facts in relation to rape. I don't particularly want to read about it, and most importantly, I'm sure her family don't want it published everywhere, but the way he has been portrayed, and the fact he has even been consulted about what was to be released is certainty skewed to date.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/bring-back-death-penalty-says-accused-20130312-2fx8i.html
Watch the footage in the above link, and at the 2:15 mark, he is seen holding that girl&#8217;s hand (at least it looks to me that way). That must be his partner, the one that left him a while back that precipitated his suicide attempt. So if you are correct that the police need his consent to release details, then obviously he consented to that footage being released to get back at his girlfriend for leaving him. She is clearly identifiable from that footage. I personally cannot believe the police released that video footage, so blatantly implicating her as his girlfriend, thereby playing into Bayley's hands for revenge against his now ex-girlfriend. The police are wrong for releasing that video footage. I wouldn&#8217;t have released that. Maybe she required a suppression order to keep it out of the public eye. I sure as hell would have granted her that if I were the judge. He's just raped and murdered a woman; you can't just release video footage of some innocent female holding hands with him- they should have at least blurred her face. It tarnishes her, too. Unless she was implicated in the crime against Jill also (i.e. Bayley does the crime, freaks out, goes home, speaks to his g/f for counsel about it, she has a fit over it, then they discuss it and arrive at the conclusion he must dispose of the body; thus he does so, with her knowledge (did she even go along for the ride with him at 4am?)- rendering her party to the crime after the fact) and the cops suspect it, though cannot prove it, so they just had a dig at her by releasing her image alongside his holding hands. This is tremendously suspect to me.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

Were the public free to enter court today to listen to the hearing to hear facts which have been suppressed? I did not hear it was a closed hearing, so I presume any member of the public could walk in and listen. Is that correct?
<modsnip>

Over at the Victoria Police website: http://www.vicpolicenews.com.au/ all we find is this:
Police investigate kangaroo shootings - Upper Plenty
Tuesday, 12 March 2013 21:10
Police have charged a man as part of an ongoing investigation into an animal cruelty incident in Upper Plenty last week.

This is a farce. The police should be updating us about cases like this, not some market-driven, profit-seeking capitalist behind-paywall outfit run by the Murdochs, Packers, Rineharts of the world.

Does anyone know the protocols for going about seeking information on cases such as this? Has anyone had any experience? What has that experience been like? Good or bad? I want to know who has access to information.

I want to know whether the police are just making up these charges of oral, anal, vaginal rape (3 rape charges)- in order to get him a higher sentence because of the greater degradation of his offending. If he&#8217;s denying it, then what evidence do the cops have to bring those charges? Something we can&#8217;t know, I suppose; we, the gullible many. So if evidence was provided, the papers and those in court all know, now bound by secrecy, and we&#8217;re getting some dribs and drabs. Screw this. If the laws need to be changed, then they should. Police should not go fishing around for charges to game the broken system. Fix the system, not the charges.

Cap in hand, we go begging for information. Off to the profiteers we go.

I seriously doubt Police are making up the charges.. they would have forensic evidence that he did rape her in all three ways, if that is their charges- an autopsy was performed. And at this stage as its a committal hearing I am not sure all that evidence will be known to all who were in court yet. You would believe the accused in his denials, but not the police? He is also denying killing Jill, and yet he has previously admitted it and was able to take police to where her body was buried..

 

[Alice Bernadette]

Were the public free to enter court today to listen to the hearing to hear facts which have been suppressed? I did not hear it was a closed hearing, so I presume any member of the public could walk in and listen. Is that correct?
<modsnip>

Over at the Victoria Police website: http://www.vicpolicenews.com.au/ all we find is this:
Police investigate kangaroo shootings - Upper Plenty
Tuesday, 12 March 2013 21:10
Police have charged a man as part of an ongoing investigation into an animal cruelty incident in Upper Plenty last week.

This is a farce. The police should be updating us about cases like this, not some market-driven, profit-seeking capitalist behind-paywall outfit run by the Murdochs, Packers, Rineharts of the world.

Does anyone know the protocols for going about seeking information on cases such as this? Has anyone had any experience? What has that experience been like? Good or bad? I want to know who has access to information.

I want to know whether the police are just making up these charges of oral, anal, vaginal rape (3 rape charges)- in order to get him a higher sentence because of the greater degradation of his offending. If he&#8217;s denying it, then what evidence do the cops have to bring those charges? Something we can&#8217;t know, I suppose; we, the gullible many. So if evidence was provided, the papers and those in court all know, now bound by secrecy, and we&#8217;re getting some dribs and drabs. Screw this. If the laws need to be changed, then they should. Police should not go fishing around for charges to game the broken system. Fix the system, not the charges.

Cap in hand, we go begging for information. Off to the profiteers we go.

I completely agree. I don't know why the public is not given the information in these cases. I know there has to be some sensitivity to the loved ones but they have been through the worst thing anyone can go through anyway. I think the public should know what these monsters do. Who exactly are they protecting in these situations?

If people know the horror of what these people do maybe they would be locked up for life instead of being let out to prey on innocent people.

The scary thing is that Bayley looks just like any normal man. I know that you can't tell by looking at someone if they are evil but still it is scary how completely average he looks. Definitely a wolf in sheep's clothing.