Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat, 4 Feb 2024 *Arrest* #12

[Rocket333]

I would find it difficult to believe that Ms O'Brien did not comprehensively go thru every element of any proposition Stephenson referred to in their consultations..

I agree that he would have been aware.
So, what’s left? No alibi?

 

[SouthAussie]

Why is the timeframe 7am to 7pm?

My guess is that 7am and 7pm are the times that others can confirm they were with him, and there has been no other confirmation between those times.

Maybe left some place at 7am and didn't return to whatever same or other place until 7pm.

 

[Trooper]

I agree that he would have been aware.
So, what’s left? No alibi?

No acceptable alibi.. He needs a rock hard alibi, an irrefutable one. that completely destroys the VICPOL case. Nothing less will do.

 

[Deleted member 296739]

For Harriet.. SC or KC..

The only difference between King's Counsel (KC) and Senior Counsel (SC) in Australian law is the name. Both titles refer to senior barristers who are often involved in complex or serious cases.


The process for becoming a senior barrister varies by state and territory:

Thank you- I was about to ask

 

[Rocket333]

No acceptable alibi.. He needs a rock hard alibi, an irrefutable one. that completely destroys the VICPOL case. Nothing less will do.

Do you think his requests for phone calls & visits might increase this fortnight?
“Anyone?”

 

[JLZ]

My guess is that 7am and 7pm are the times that others can confirm they were with him, and there has been no other confirmation between those times.

Maybe left some place at 7am and didn't return to whatever same or other place until 7pm.

I think the prosecution is going for the widest time span they can get. They are alleging he disposed of Samantha's body some time that day I presume. So the times would be relevant to the charges.

 

[Marg944]

Where did you see the times of the alibi evidence required within 14 days? The 7am to 7pm bit? I have been looking for a link to that info but I can't find one.

The reason that I am wondering about it is that is the exact times that the police were initially asking for dash cam video.


23 February 2024
Detectives are also urging anyone travelling through the area, particularly between 7am and 7pm on Sunday 4 February, who may have dash-cam footage to also check this for possible sightings.

Police 'very doubtful' missing Ballarat mother Samantha Murphy is still alive

Police have launched a new targeted search of an area in Ballarat, and say they believe "one or more parties" were involved in Samantha Murphy's disappearance.

www.sbs.com.au

I have found the request for the alibi, but I’ve found no link to any mention in court of “7am and 7pm”.

“The magistrate also reminded Stephenson that he now had 14 days from today to file alibi evidence if he wished to raise any at trial. He told the 23-year-old that it was “very important” to obtain legal representation for the trial.”

Families watch on as Samantha Murphy’s accused killer opts to fast-track murder trial

Patrick Stephenson will have his trial fast-tracked to the Supreme Court after pleading not guilty to murdering the missing Ballarat mother.

www.theage.com.au

 

[SouthAussie]

I have found the request for the alibi, but I’ve found no link to any mention in court of “7am and 7pm”.

“The magistrate also reminded Stephenson that he now had 14 days from today to file alibi evidence if he wished to raise any at trial. He told the 23-year-old that it was “very important” to obtain legal representation for the trial.”

Families watch on as Samantha Murphy’s accused killer opts to fast-track murder trial

Patrick Stephenson will have his trial fast-tracked to the Supreme Court after pleading not guilty to murdering the missing Ballarat mother.

www.theage.com.au

Yes, that is all I can find also. The only place I can find those times is in older articles calling for dash cam footage.

 

[SouthAussie]

I think the prosecution is going for the widest time span they can get. They are alleging he disposed of Samantha's body some time that day I presume. So the times would be relevant to the charges.

We know that Sam left her house at around 7am. Maybe PS showed up for the first time that day at 7pm somewhere.

 

[Ron Jeremy]

Where did you see the times of the alibi evidence required within 14 days? The 7am to 7pm bit? I have been looking for a link to that info but I can't find one.

The reason that I am wondering about it is that is the exact times that the police were initially asking for dash cam video.


23 February 2024
Detectives are also urging anyone travelling through the area, particularly between 7am and 7pm on Sunday 4 February, who may have dash-cam footage to also check this for possible sightings.

Police 'very doubtful' missing Ballarat mother Samantha Murphy is still alive

Police have launched a new targeted search of an area in Ballarat, and say they believe "one or more parties" were involved in Samantha Murphy's disappearance.

www.sbs.com.au

I was using the already pre published times quoted as you discovered - but I also recall something else coming out about it, may have been mentioned in a presser. Those times make perfect sense - without overthinking it,

 

[JLZ]

Took me in.

 

[Rocket333]

We know that Sam left her house at around 7am. Maybe PS showed up for the first time that day at 7pm somewhere.

Sunset on 4th Feb was 6.45pm if that’s at all relevant.
Maybe it’s just a 12 hour window, or he was clearly accounted for (dinner with his parents etc) after 7pm.

 

[Ron Jeremy]

Sunset on 4th Feb was 6.45pm if that’s at all relevant.
Maybe it’s just a 12 hour window, or he was clearly accounted for (dinner with his parents etc) after 7pm.

Correct…. he’s accounted for before 7am…. cctv, verbal reports… and as you said after 7pm. As I’ve said previous-this guy has backed himself into a corner massively… he’s been presented with what the prosecution have on him, but his whereabouts at certain times of the day to which he can’t confirm yet almost seems like an afterthought for him and as someone mentioned earlier - he’s going to be asking for 6 phone calls a day instead of one!

 

[Rocket333]

The more this thing goes on the more I am convinced that this whole event is going to be taking place in Ballarat. .. Fly a Supreme Court judge up every day, house and feed all his assistants, house the prisoner somewhere safe for months, employ a battalion of security, set up a barrier in Grenville St, divert the traffic, ..
He comes from Ballarat, Mrs Murphy comes from Ballarat, the crime took place in the Ballarat district, ......I don't see any reason to have it down in he VIC Supreme Court building in WIlliam St , Melbourne

I think the trial will take place in Ballarat too and that would be a good thing all round.
How difficult is it going to be to select a jury though?

 

[HoneyBunOne]

My operative theory, in the light of the absence of Galbally barristers, is , that is what has actually happened. My theory goes like this. they received all the stuff from the DPP< the excessive , unprecedented stuff, the CCTV and all that.. went over it with their usual fine toothcomb concentration and professionalism, and, as all barristers must do, gave their client their best options.

And that Stephenson has disagreed with their proposed best options that are open to him , and Galbally's have retired gracefully and silently,...

I just can't come up with another explanation that fits the parameters. I've probably missed something so significant, like an elephant in the room that I am not seeing..

Bingo! My money is on this being the case. IMO he has dug his heels in, saying he didn't do it, they can't prove it etc despite the evidence that lead police to say vehemently that Samantha was killed around 8am, in a deliberate act, at Mt Clear. At what point the parting of the ways happened, I'm not sure, but he seemed ill prepared for his Nov 14th appearance.

I wonder if the evidence isn't as glittering as we think. The "unprecedented" amount of CCTV is concerning to me. If there was any damning footage in there, why not just submit a small amount of footage showing the important events? Does the large amount of footage suggest quantity over quality?

Maybe there is some genuine belief on his part that he won't be convicted based on the evidence?

I don't think it's quantity over quality. Whilst not every piece of evidence may show PS, or a crime occurring, I feel it will paint a picture of where he was, or more importantly where he wasn't. It may tell the story of his actions and frame of mind the night before, where he went (or didn't go) afterwards, where he shopped, what he looked like on that fateful day and shortly after etc. What it doesn't show tells a story too.

I think this latest legal team drama is a bit like a swan that appears elegant and calm above the surface of the water, while madly scrambling below. Whilst nothing about PS is elegant, he's appearing in court and doing what he needs to (with some omissions) but trying to organise legal representation that he can work with behind the scenes. If he had somewhat long term representation, I feel he would have addressed the alibi situation. I think he may very well be between teams, which is less than ideal with another court date coming up in less than 2 weeks. It suggests to me that he is in disagreement with the consensus of several legal eagles and is adamant that he won't get found guilty. He still feels cocky & invincible, and above the law IMO. Personally, if I was pleading not guilty, and in fact not guilty, I would be presenting an alibi, even if it was me getting off my head with my coke dealer, cheating on my girlfriend, or having a sleep in and a quiet day at home by myself.

 

[Ron Jeremy]

Bingo! My money is on this being the case. IMO he has dug his heels in, saying he didn't do it, they can't prove it etc despite the evidence that lead police to say vehemently that Samantha was killed around 8am, in a deliberate act, at Mt Clear. At what point the parting of the ways happened, I'm not sure, but he seemed ill prepared for his Nov 14th appearance.



I don't think it's quantity over quality. Whilst not every piece of evidence may show PS, or a crime occurring, I feel it will paint a picture of where he was, or more importantly where he wasn't. It may tell the story of his actions and frame of mind the night before, where he went (or didn't go) afterwards, where he shopped, what he looked like on that fateful day and shortly after etc. What it doesn't show tells a story too.

I think this latest legal team drama is a bit like a swan that appears elegant and calm above the surface of the water, while madly scrambling below. Whilst nothing about PS is elegant, he's appearing in court and doing what he needs to (with some omissions) but trying to organise legal representation that he can work with behind the scenes. If he had somewhat long term representation, I feel he would have addressed the alibi situation. I think he may very well be between teams, which is less than ideal with another court date coming up in less than 2 weeks. It suggests to me that he is in disagreement with the consensus of several legal eagles and is adamant that he won't get found guilty. He still feels cocky & invincible, and above the law IMO. Personally, if I was pleading not guilty, and in fact not guilty, I would be presenting an alibi, even if it was me getting off my head with my coke dealer, cheating on my girlfriend, or having a sleep in and a quiet day at home by myself.

100%

 

[mrjitty]

On discovery, technically the prosecution only have to give over the stuff relevant to the trial, but in practice these days, they just hand everything over to avoid the risk of missing something out. That leads to these increasingly common mega-discoveries.

IMO based on recent trials I have followed

 

[mrjitty]

Personally, if I was pleading not guilty, and in fact not guilty, I would be presenting an alibi, even if it was me getting off my head with my coke dealer, cheating on my girlfriend, or having a sleep in and a quiet day at home by myself.

RSBM

Remember this is evidential procedure. The point is not claiming an alibi, but the evidential foundation for one.

On the first 2 examples, you would need those witnesses. On the 3rd one, the accused would have to testify, or at least have said that in a pre-trial interview.

This is why an alibi is often not presented, indeed even if you are innocent. Because you may not be wanting to testify at trial.

 

[Deleted member 296739]

Do you think his requests for phone calls & visits might increase this fortnight?
“Anyone?”

Are calls and visits recorded in Australia?

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

Yes, the defence is there, keeping in mind, the defence already has the stuff the Prosecution intends to bring to trial.. sometimes a little thing is held back, a viewpoint, a theory, but the defence has had all the relevant matters for months, now, in fact, there was so much given to them , artifacts, CCTV, recordings, whatnots, by the Prosecution ( that the police gave to the DPP ) that an extension of 4 months was granted , because it was of such unprecedented quantity.

And yes, the Prosecution is there also, during a committal hearing.

Who isn't there? the Press. It is not to be reported. ( gritted teeth emoji ) .. .

Thanks for your reply/info., Trooper!