Australia Australia - Theo Hayez, 18, Belgian backpacker, Byron Bay, June 2019 #3

[Rocket333]

Agreed. My bet is on Theo being fought by a gang on the concrete slab. Probably punched in face, falls backwards and head slams on concrete. Accidental death, as happened to 18 year old Daniel Christie in Kings Cross. One gang member takes his phone on a wild goose chase. The others take his body out of town in a car. Body is NOT in Byron Bay. Cap is planted along track later. Would be so easy to solve this case if this scenario is true. IMO this is a cover up to protect tourism in Byron Bay. #TourismTrumpsTheo

I’d add that anything violent that happened did so at or beyond CC. The case for Theo being at CC is still too strong IMO. There’s no news from the Tallow car park, campers or visitors there on the night, is there?

 

[Jables333]

The police need some evidence of a crime to do the virtual dragnets don’t they?

Do you happen to know where can we read this law?

I haven't been able to find out on Google yet.

Also... talking of evidence.

So far there is no concrete evidence that Theo fell that we have been made aware of. Also the family seems to still be looking for answers so I assume they have seen no evidence either. They rejected this theory.

If there was indeed some evidence to support a fall, and thus proof of no crime, then what motive is there to keep the evidence quiet?

Now on the other hand what does seem fairly 'solid' is that Theo went to a dodgy youth gang hangout location late on a Friday night. Then he appears to have hiked at a fair speed through pitch black bushland to a place he'd never been before. And then he disappeared.

If that doesn't sound fishy then I don't know what does!

And so given the lack of any evidence of a fall or accident - and the high likelihood of foul play - I'd like to understand why a judge cannot be asked to sign a geo-fence warrant to capture Google data from phones in the specific locations where Theo was, after he left Cheeky Monkeys.

This article references a geo-fence warrant being signed off by a judge in 10 minutes. The Americans have been using these since 2016. With mixed success, yes. But they were using them in quite heavily populated areas. Not remote areas like the Rec Grounds, Milne Track, Cosy Corner etc.

How did the police know you were near a crime scene? Google told them

It's been six months...

 

[SouthAussie]

Do you happen to know where can we read this law?

I haven't been able to find out on Google yet.

Google:
"The government needs legal process—such as a subpoena, court order or search warrant—to force Google to disclose user information. Exceptions can be made in certain emergency cases, though even then the government can't force Google to disclose."
Legal process for user data requests FAQs - Transparency Report Help Center

In the US:
"The Fourth Amendment says a warrant must request a limited search and establish probable cause that evidence related to a crime will be found."
Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

In NSW:
"The judicial officer granting the search warrant must be convinced that the Police do have reasonable grounds for believing that evidence will be found on the premises and furthermore, that the discovery of such evidence will result in an arrest."
Police Search Warrants In NSW - Criminal Lawyers Sydney

 

[sparks030405]

I’d add that anything violent that happened did so at or beyond CC.

I disagree. My post was that something violent happened off Tennyson St behind the shipping container on the concrete cricket pitches...

 

[Jables333]

Google:
"The government needs legal process—such as a subpoena, court order or search warrant—to force Google to disclose user information. Exceptions can be made in certain emergency cases, though even then the government can't force Google to disclose."
Legal process for user data requests FAQs - Transparency Report Help Center

In the US:
"The Fourth Amendment says a warrant must request a limited search and establish probable cause that evidence related to a crime will be found."
Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

In NSW:
"The judicial officer granting the search warrant must be convinced that the Police do have reasonable grounds for believing that evidence will be found on the premises and furthermore, that the discovery of such evidence will result in an arrest."
Police Search Warrants In NSW - Criminal Lawyers Sydney

Thanks, I'm still stuck though because the first link doesn't mention geo-fence data.

And the NSW link is related to search warrants, which is not the same as a geo-fence warrant.

Seeing as there's no evidence anywhere else, I'm not sure why a judge would block this as there is a likelihood of evidence being found.

Have the police asked? Have they been denied?

"The new (geo-fence) warrants go further, suggesting possible suspects and witnesses in the absence of other clues. "

Remember, Google doesn't give the police your data up front.

First they define an area and a time frame. Then assign a code number to devices in that area at that time. Only once they narrow the field to a few devices they think belong to suspects or witnesses, Google reveals the users’ names and other information.

It's explained here: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

 

[SouthAussie]

Thanks, I'm still stuck though because the first link doesn't mention geo-fence data.

And the NSW link is related to search warrants, which is not the same as a geo-fence warrant.

Seeing as there's no evidence anywhere else, I'm not sure why a judge would block this as there is a likelihood of evidence being found.

Have the police asked? Have they been denied?

"The new (geo-fence) warrants go further, suggesting possible suspects and witnesses in the absence of other clues. "

Remember, Google doesn't give the police your data up front.

First they define an area and a time frame. Then assign a code number to devices in that area at that time. Only once they narrow the field to a few devices they think belong to suspects or witnesses, Google reveals the users’ names and other information.

It's explained here: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

I have read your linked article already. I think what I have offered is all that you will find.

"The new warrants go further, suggesting possible suspects and witnesses in the absence of other clues."
Possible suspects of what? Possible witnesses to what? In your linked article it is referring to a particular crime. There is, as far as we know, no evidence of a crime with regard to Theo.

The police cannot just go on a fishing expedition - with no known crime having been committed - that violates privacy laws in many countries AFAIK.

I am not contesting your thoughts and hopes, just trying to offer you what I think is the answer to your question.

 

[Deleted member 249471]

Completely agreed.

WHO specifically would be experienced enough to jog that beach track in the dark? What’s their profile?

Who fits profile? Lol, I’ll let you in on a very early theory of mine, before podcast began so I didn’t know about Theo stopping by the concrete slab and all the phone use afterwards...

My theory was that a firefighter or volunteer was involved. The particular Milne path Theo followed was often referred to as the fire trail as it allows truck access to the area.

AND Theo happened to walk past the fire station on Kingsley, right after CMs, which has no cctv. Plus, there’s also a stretch of dark parking after it.

I imagined a firefighter/pervert hanging around there after a shift, seizing the opportunity once seeing a vulnerable person, and abusing the sense of safety people feel towards firefighters.

Seems a bit silly now.

The podcast mentioned people do use that track to get to beach, including tourists. But during the day. Not sure who would use it at night.

 

[BusterXP]

I have read your linked article already. I think what I have offered is all that you will find.

"The new warrants go further, suggesting possible suspects and witnesses in the absence of other clues."
Possible suspects of what? Possible witnesses to what? In your linked article it is referring to a particular crime. There is, as far as we know, no evidence of a crime with regard to Theo.

The police cannot just go on a fishing expedition - with no known crime having been committed - that violates privacy laws in many countries AFAIK.

I am not contesting your thoughts and hopes, just trying to offer you what I think is the answer to your question.

With the revisions to the data access laws they might be able to access data that doesn't identify a person. Then to follow through they'd need an authorisation.
I'd say that getting authorisatioh would be difficult with no indication of a crime. It would be difficult to get one on the grounds of just wanting to talk to someone.

 

[Rocket333]

With the revisions to the data access laws they might be able to access data that doesn't identify a person. Then to follow through they'd need an authorisation.
I'd say that getting authorisatioh would be difficult with no indication of a crime. It would be difficult to get one on the grounds of just wanting to talk to someone.

Hmmm. Such a conundrum as there’s really currently only speculation. Can anyone identify any solid grounds of suspicion to move anything forward? That probably wouldn’t be sufficient I guess anyway.

 

[Pod]

I used to think that Theo never made it to Cosy Corner safely, but his family are 100% convinced that he was still in control of his mobile phone until the last message sent. That rules out foul play at the beginning of his trip. I do believe that he followed the homeless man from the beach camp through the bush, however it is plausible that they then went their seperate way. I’d say Theo lost his hat on the way out. It doesn’t make sense that he didn’t stop to look for it... There’s holes in every theory, it just makes no sense.

 

[BusterXP]

Hmmm. Such a conundrum as there’s really currently only speculation. Can anyone identify any solid grounds of suspicion to move anything forward? That probably wouldn’t be sufficient I guess anyway.

'Does the assustance relate to the enforcement of serious offences (3 years imprisonment or more)?'. 'Does the agency have the appropriate warrant or authorisation?'.
In the flowchart.
The Assistance and Access Act 2018
Where's the evidence of a serious crime having been commited?
If there was a rape or robbery or body found then different story.

The relevant Federal Legislation is at
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979
It all relates to offences.

 

[Rocket333]

'Does the assustance relate to the enforcement of serious offences (3 years imprisonment or more)?'. 'Does the agency have the appropriate warrant or authorisation?'.
In the flowchart.
The Assistance and Access Act 2018
Where's the evidence of a serious crime having been commited?
If there was a rape or robbery or body found then different story.

Thanks, just read through that and yep, the complexities are clear. There’s no evidence of a (serious) crime having been committed. No body, no messages, no blood, no personal effects except an “inconclusive” cap, and zero witnesses.

 

[espirtu pampa]

Thanks, just read through that and yep, the complexities are clear. There’s no evidence of a (serious) crime having been committed. No body, no messages, no blood, no personal effects except an “inconclusive” cap, and zero witnesses.

The ransom demand does'nt fall into one of the categories ?

 

[BusterXP]

The ransom demand does'nt fall into one of the categories ?

No causal link to phones in the area. . It would be subject to a warrant for data from the carrier for that crime if it originated in Australia instead of South Africa.

 

[Jables333]

I have read your linked article already. I think what I have offered is all that you will find.

"The new warrants go further, suggesting possible suspects and witnesses in the absence of other clues."
Possible suspects of what? Possible witnesses to what? In your linked article it is referring to a particular crime. There is, as far as we know, no evidence of a crime with regard to Theo.

The police cannot just go on a fishing expedition - with no known crime having been committed - that violates privacy laws in many countries AFAIK.

I am not contesting your thoughts and hopes, just trying to offer you what I think is the answer to your question.

Right, so perhaps that is where it's falling down because there's no hard evidence of a crime, or anything... yet.

 

[espirtu pampa]

Thinking of the grief, energy, time and money the family, friends and volunteers are going through it is high time one thinks to change the system. In the UK they search with telecom data when someone vanishes but of course it doen't mean a suspect is going to admit. But at least the utmost is done.

 

[espirtu pampa]

Right, so perhaps that is where it's falling down because there's no hard evidence of a crime, or anything... yet.

And the cap that is not sufficiently ( what % ?) proved it is Théo's... Maybe the Coroner will ask more but as David Murray says in the Podcast time is ticking

 

[mussopossum]

I disagree. My post was that something violent happened off Tennyson St behind the shipping container on the concrete cricket pitches...

My thoughts are still in limbo on this.

If something happened to Theo at Tennyson as you suggest, I would say in that case the phone data from Tennyson to CC was not Theo holding the phone. It might be the person who may have done something to Theo that might be familiar with the Milne / goat tracks bush area at Tallows and took his phone and cap, the erratic weaving in and out through an area we would assume only known to those familiar with it.

They may have been attempting to flee the area to be undetected after a crime? but the data shows they walked and not drove so what would have happened to Theos body? Unless there was gang there that had a car and drove him away.

If Theo was hurt here and still alive I cant see him walking to CC TBH. From what we know of the sensible intelligent young man he likely would stay in the streetlights and knock on a door for help, not go to another dark remote area.

It would make sense then knowing the way to avoid around the homeless camps and also knowing the little area in the bush at CC.

If he was hurt at CC I believe he was with someone who lured him there.

I am still thinking he got out of there and it happened on the streets though, IMO

 

[Rocket333]

My thoughts are still in limbo on this.

If something happened to Theo at Tennyson as you suggest, I would say in that case the phone data from Tennyson to CC was not Theo holding the phone. It might be the person who may have done something to Theo that might be familiar with the Milne / goat tracks bush area at Tallows and took his phone and cap, the erratic weaving in and out through an area we would assume only known to those familiar with it.

They may have been attempting to flee the area to be undetected after a crime? but the data shows they walked and not drove so what would have happened to Theos body? Unless there was gang there that had a car and drove him away.

If Theo was hurt here and still alive I cant see him walking to CC TBH. From what we know of the sensible intelligent young man he likely would stay in the streetlights and knock on a door for help, not go to another dark remote area.

It would make sense then knowing the way to avoid around the homeless camps and also knowing the little area in the bush at CC.

If he was hurt at CC I believe he was with someone who lured him there.

I am still thinking he got out of there and it happened on the streets though, IMO

Yes, all equally possible of course. I think (at this stage) he wasn’t physically injured at Tennyson, and it was him at CC. I think the harm happened at or after CC. If he didn’t fall off the cliff, that he left by the same beach track or by the Tallow car park. I wouldn’t be surprised if his phone is under sand at CC.

 

[mussopossum]

If you had an OPPO R17 phone what would you test in the settings to try and recreate Theos actions that night?