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

[Trooper]

I keep coming back to this. As you say, Troops, to make any one of these claims is astounding, but all of them! It seems that seldom before was anything so cut and dried! There just can't be any defence, surely?

That's the bit that sticks.. Patten , a conservative and pared-down speaker, not given to hyperbole , not a man given to flights of fancy.. taking responsibility, sole responsibility for announcements about this crime, everything wrong blows back on him, gets up in front of a mic, in front of 6.82 million Victorians, all hanging on his every word, because Mrs Murphy's disappearance off the face of the earth is horrifying, and lays it out as the evidence ( evidence he must , once spoken about , produce in court , via the DPP) has led him to believe.

Everything Patten said that day has to be reproduced in court, and it has to show, it has to lead to the same conclusion that VICPOL came to. That is the prosecutions position. Of course, there may be much more to the story, but those elements Patten claims have to be presented.

There seems, on the face of it, no room for error, or mistake, and the Chief Commander VICPOL, Patten , has not resiled from this position. This is what the evidence VICPOL has, ( I have no clue how, or what mechanism, or technique was used ) this is what it shows, this is what VICPOL says happened. She is dead, he murdered her , attacking her, at 8am at Mt Clear. ..

 

[Rocket333]

Sending condolences once again to Mr. Murphy and the rest of Samantha's loved ones. It's got to be like living a nightmare.

Dramatic moment Samantha Murphy's husband stares at the man accused of killing his wife - as he finally confronts him for the first time - USMAIL24-News Of America

The heartbroken husband of missing Ballarat mother Samantha Murphy has faced her alleged killer for the first time in court. Mick Murphy could barely contain his emotions on Thursday as Patrick Orren Stephenson pleaded not guilty to his wife’s murder. Sitting at the front of the Ballarat...

usmail24.com

It would be a living nightmare for the Murphy’s …. and also for the Stephenson’s. No winners, no joy, no respite, just ongoing pain, sorrow and anguish. Letting Samantha return to her loved ones is such a necessary act, and I hope it happens.

 

[Trooper]

I find this interesting (a quote from the below news article):
"With his arms folded, a relaxed Stephenson simply said the words: “Not guilty, Your Honor” when asked for his plea."

Arms folded is what experts deem to be somewhat of a defiant, closed off position. Does this indicate he's hiding things? Is he sending a subtle F you to the court and police? Surely if he had counsel, they would word him up on the basics of presentation and making a good impression? Maybe he is flying solo at the moment?

Dramatic moment Samantha Murphy's husband stares at the man accused of killing his wife - as he finally confronts him for the first time - USMAIL24-News Of America

The heartbroken husband of missing Ballarat mother Samantha Murphy has faced her alleged killer for the first time in court. Mick Murphy could barely contain his emotions on Thursday as Patrick Orren Stephenson pleaded not guilty to his wife’s murder. Sitting at the front of the Ballarat...

usmail24.com

To me, that was another pointer that things had broken down with his legal reps. No barrister would have let him enter the courtroom without a 40 minute woodshedding on how to sit, stand, speak,, how to comport himself to his very best advantage. It is part of their job, putting their client at his/her best projection., .. I don't doubt that Allen spoke with him about this, 'uncross your arms'.. , and I don't doubt that Stephenson said a big up yours to him, to the court, to Mick Murphy, to Lorna Murphy, and to his own sisters...

 

[Dotta]

DM worded it differently:

"The heartbroken husband of missing Ballarat mum Samantha Murphy has
stared down
her alleged killer for the first time in court.

Seated at the front of the Ballarat Magistrates' Court,
Mr Murphy
glared
at the video screen in court where Stephenson appeared from a room within Melbourne Assessment Prison.

Now sporting long hair and
a woolly beard,

Yuck, yuck!!!

Stephenson appeared calm
as he officially denied murdering Ms Murphy,
whose body has still not been found."

I wish strength to Samantha's family!

Dramatic moment Samantha Murphy's husband stares down accused killer

The heartbroken husband of missing Ballarat mum Samantha Murphy has stared down her alleged killer for the first time in court.

www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[Rocket333]

To me, that was another pointer that things had broken down with his legal reps. No barrister would have let him enter the courtroom without a 40 minute woodshedding on how to sit, stand, speak,, how to comport himself to his very best advantage. It is part of their job, putting their client at his/her best projection., .. I don't doubt that Allen spoke with him, and I don't doubt that Stephenson said a big up yours to him, to the court, to Mick Murphy, to Lorna Murphy, and to his own sisters...

The white tshirt struck me as casual too. Would he ordinarily be advised to wear a shirt and tie or the like?
I’ve always thought his parents and sisters might be his Achilles Heel, particularly his father. That’s why I questioned earlier whether his father appeared in court last week (or just his mother as reported). Maybe they aren’t and no one is spared the sass.

 

[Trooper]

That's the thing about Zoom. the camera would not be showing Mick Murphy 'glaring' at anyone. The camera is there for the judge, and the accused, and the Clerk of Courts, and the sheriff, and the transcript takers. It does not pan around to the members of the public in the gallery. Stephenson would have no clue who was watching. Or, as they say in the Daily mail, 'glaring'..

 

[Rocket333]

DM worded it differently:

"The heartbroken husband of missing Ballarat mum Samantha Murphy has
stared down
her alleged killer for the first time in court.

Seated at the front of the Ballarat Magistrates' Court,
Mr Murphy
glared
at the video screen in court where Stephenson appeared from a room within Melbourne Assessment Prison.

Now sporting long hair and
a woolly beard,

Yuck, yuck!!!

Stephenson appeared calm
as he officially denied murdering Ms Murphy,
whose body has still not been found."

View attachment 545627

Dramatic moment Samantha Murphy's husband stares down accused killer

The heartbroken husband of missing Ballarat mum Samantha Murphy has stared down her alleged killer for the first time in court.

www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org

So they can all see each other in court in person or via screens? Mick can see Whitney and Patrick and Patrick can see Mick etc?
Imagine….

 

[Trooper]

The white tshirt struck me as casual too. Would he ordinarily be advised to wear a shirt and tie or the like?
I’ve always thought his parents and sisters might be his Achilles Heel, particularly his father. That’s why I questioned earlier whether his father appeared in court last week (or just his mother as reported). Maybe they aren’t and no one is spared the sass.

He would have had suggested to him to have a haircut and a shave, at the very least. And it would have been done for him... there are 2 fulltime barbers in the Remand centre who do nothing else but this on Court Day. This appearance of shaggy insouciance is a front, a confected projection sending a message,.. to whom and what, I don't know.

 

[Trooper]

So they can all see each other in court in person or via screens? Mick can see Whitney and Patrick and Patrick can see Mick etc?
Imagine….

Like,, as if!!!

 

[Ron Jeremy]

The way he spoke caught my attention…he’s not a meek and mild fellow put it that way..came across as pretty head strong.

 

[Rocket333]

Like,, as if!!!

Oh come on that would be great. Mick deserves a mega glare. haha

 

[Melt71]

<snip> He still feels cocky & invincible, and above the law IMO. <snip>

My opinion is that he's not very smart, his mental health is poorly managed (I'd like to hear more about exactly how many drugs he's done over time) and his legal advice is minimal or poor for whatever of the reasons that has been outlined above. I don't see any cocky/invincible at all. He reminds me of the relative I keep referring to, who was charged with something less than - but not much less than - murder in Victoria.

Which is to say, we all have our own opinions and we will have to wait for the court case until we know more.

 

[mrjitty]

It doesn't matter how many times this mantra is repeated, it is meaningless without the concrete rider that this presumption is in a Court of Law. In the public domain, not so.

To which i'd add, there are other burdens and presumptions at work

In old money, we always spoke of "case to answer". In other words the prosecutor does not even bring a case unless the prospects for conviction are good - this is worded in different ways in different countries but the point is, no long shots get brought in the first place.

So in simple terms, once you get past an initial arrest, and into charges, the court has oversight, and no one is going to be held on remand unless the presumption is great.

Personally I always give deference to the institution of the crown prosecutor for this reason. The office has formed that opinion based on the evidence, and in effect the defence and court agree - because if they did not, the defendant would be out on bail at the least.

MOO

 

[Trooper]

To which i'd add, there are other burdens and presumptions at work

In old money, we always spoke of "case to answer". In other words the prosecutor does not even bring a case unless the prospects for conviction are good - this is worded in different ways in different countries but the point is, no long shots get brought in the first place.

So in simple terms, once you get past an initial arrest, and into charges, the court has oversight, and no one is going to be held on remand unless the presumption is great.

Personally I always give deference to the institution of the crown prosecutor for this reason. The office has formed that opinion based on the evidence, and in effect the defence and court agree - because if they did not, the defendant would be out on bail at the least.

MOO

Precisely.

 

[Trooper]

The way he spoke caught my attention…he’s not a meek and mild fellow put it that way..came across as pretty head strong.

I think you are on the money there, Ron. underneath that silent , glowering facade lies a furious resentful vengeful child..

 

[Rocket333]

The way he spoke caught my attention…he’s not a meek and mild fellow put it that way..came across as pretty head strong.

Can you hear him speak somewhere? Or are you referring to the media reports of what he said in court?

Samantha Murphy: Ballarat murder trial fast-tracked after Patrick Stephenson pleads not guilty

Court hears Stephenson denies murdering Ballarat woman after her family last saw her leaving to go on a run

www.theguardian.com

 

[Warshawski]

The event that has disturbed me , probably disproportionately , is that his whole family moved right out of the state and far away the day he was arrested. This is Dad, with a thriving electricians business, with employees , Mum with a long career as a schoolteacher, one daughter in a fast track career in a Real Estate agence, I forget what the other one did, but it was sigificant.. up they went. This is very very unusual , they have every right to do it, every reason to, from my point of view, but not many families of arrestees do that. I cannot think of any , offhand,

This is not a criticism, but something drove them to make such an upheaval in their lives at that time, apart from the arrest .. that whatever VICPOL had, convinced them.

I agree Trooper, this has really disturbed me from the outset too. … it’s certainly a huge thing to Up & Leave businesses, jobs etc almost in the blink of an eye. I don’t know how I’d survive if I had to do that.
It did make me wonder whether perhaps there was a threat to their safety etc, but then I was told the sister in Real Estate did not leave Ballarat ( is there a local here who can substantiate ?) . I doubt she’d stay in the face of danger but I have no idea. It’s just all so terribly sad.

 

[Dotta]

Family's runner act is very strange.
To put it mildly

JMO

 

[Rocket333]

I was thinking about whether Samantha and the accused got into an argument and she was king hit or something, but that wouldn’t meet the criteria for the charge. The “why” of this is confounding. Could this actually be straight up gratuitous violence, or is it actually sexually motivated? Is deliberately running her down with a vehicle within the realm of a deliberate act? I know the police denied this but what was with the “look out for damaged vehicles” request. Was she chased by the car and her heartbeat and movements detected a change in pace and erratic movements followed by a complete ceasing of all activity? Is the watch critical here?
Why the need to take the body away when you could hide it nearby? Better chance of evasion and needing to hide further incriminating evidence?

“Police Chief Commissioner Shane Patton said police would allege Ms Murphy died in a "deliberate attack" in the Ballarat suburb of Mount Clear.” “A deliberate act of murder” is precise. Why did it happen and how was the deliberate act detected so confidently?

According to the Crimes Act 1958, a deliberate act of murder is defined as:

1. The accused directly caused the victim's death.

2. The actions leading to the death were conscious, voluntary, and deliberate.

3. The accused had the intent to kill or cause serious injury, fully aware that such outcomes were likely.

4. There was no lawful justification for the act, such as self-defense

Murder & Manslaughter Offences in Victoria: A Comprehensive Guide

McMahon Criminal Defence Lawyers Murder & Manslaughter Offences in Victoria: A Comprehensive Guide

www.mcdl.com.au

Crimes Act Victoria: Murder and Manslaughter | JB Solicitors

Murder and manslaughter are two of the most serious crimes in the world, and they have been around for centuries.

jbsolicitors.com.au

 

[Bats]

I was thinking about whether Samantha and the accused got into an argument and she was king hit or something, but that wouldn’t meet the criteria for the charge. The “why” of this is confounding. Could this actually be straight up gratuitous violence, or is it actually sexual motivated? Is deliberately running her over possible? That could speak to the “look out for damaged vehicles” request.
Why the need to take the body away when you could hide it nearby? Better chance of evasion and needing to hide further incriminating evidence?

“Police Chief Commissioner Shane Patton said police would allege Ms Murphy died in a "deliberate attack" in the Ballarat suburb of Mount Clear.” “A deliberate act of murder” is precise. Why did it happen and how was the deliberate act detected so confidently?

According to the Crimes Act 1958, a deliberate act of murder is defined as:

1. The accused directly caused the victim's death.

2. The actions leading to the death were conscious, voluntary, and deliberate.

3. The accused had the intent to kill or cause serious injury, fully aware that such outcomes were likely.

4. There was no lawful justification for the act, such as self-defense

Murder & Manslaughter Offences in Victoria: A Comprehensive Guide

McMahon Criminal Defence Lawyers Murder & Manslaughter Offences in Victoria: A Comprehensive Guide

www.mcdl.com.au

Crimes Act Victoria: Murder and Manslaughter | JB Solicitors

Murder and manslaughter are two of the most serious crimes in the world, and they have been around for centuries.

jbsolicitors.com.au

Yes, this has always had me wondering too.

What is it that the Police MUST have that distinguishes the act from say, manslaughter. They must have evidence of the accused committing a deliberate act to cause death.

I would guess the evidence they have is circumstantial but it will be evidence that puts the deliberate act specifically on him and no one else.

I don't believe the act was deliberately hitting her with a car since how would the police distinguish that act from accidently hitting her with the car?

It makes me wonder if there was an eyewitness.