Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat, 4 Feb 2024 *Arrest* #13

[Porky1]

OT. A crime podcaster who I can't remember now, always ended by saying "Delete your browser history"

Iam almost certain it can still be recovered with digital forensics, like a hard drive. Criminals use ‘burner phones’ to avoid their digital footprint.

Official government travel advice for those travelling to the US are recommended to leave their devices at home and take a ‘burner phone’, thanks to the extremely zealous border security searches and detainment since January, for travellers, not suspected criminals.

 

[SouthAussie]

Are we sure that a judge can't compel PS to accompany the police on a trip to the alleged crime scene(s) ?

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Are we sure that a judge can't compel PS to accompany the police on a trip to the alleged crime scene(s) ?

Police can request you participate in a scene recreation, but they cannot force you to do so.

 

[SouthAussie]

Police can request you participate in a scene recreation, but they cannot force you to do so.

I am not thinking of a scene recreation. I said a trip to the crime scene(s).

 

[BreakingNews]

The fact that he's agreed to this, is interesting as he could have said No.

Especially when we have been told from the beginning that he's not cooperating with the police and has maintained his silence. How much of this is true now ?

My bet is if he gets cornered during the trial, he might go for a plea deal then.

 

[SouthAussie]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed - AI output is not approved source as it is not always accurate>

He can, no doubt, have his legal representation accompany him on his trip to the alleged crime scene(s) or meet them there. But he can be compelled to visit the alleged crime scene(s).

He does not have to be "cooperating" or have said "okay" to be taken there.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed - AI output is not approved source as it is not always accurate>


He could still refuse with a reason, but it won't help him with his upcoming trial supposedly in September.

He is still apparently according to his legal team suffering from injuries from his motorbike accident.

Those injuries included a fractured vertebra, lacerated spleen, broken pelvis and ribs and minor head trauma.

Police allege he would go on to murder Ms Murphy just three months later despite his injuries.

Stephenson's lawyer Moya O'Brien told the court her client still suffered from those injuries, which had seen him return to hospital while behind bars.

The court heard Stephenson had lost control on a bend, going into a slide that left him crippled on the road.

Major update on Sam Murphy's alleged killer as he appears in court

The man accused of murdering Ballarat mum Samantha Murphy has made a sensational appearance in court.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[drsleuth]

He could still refuse with a reason, but it won't help him with his upcoming trial supposedly in September.

He is still apparently according to his legal team suffering from injuries from his motorbike accident.

Those injuries included a fractured vertebra, lacerated spleen, broken pelvis and ribs and minor head trauma.

Police allege he would go on to murder Ms Murphy just three months later despite his injuries.

Stephenson's lawyer Moya O'Brien told the court her client still suffered from those injuries, which had seen him return to hospital while behind bars.

The court heard Stephenson had lost control on a bend, going into a slide that left him crippled on the road.

Major update on Sam Murphy's alleged killer as he appears in court

The man accused of murdering Ballarat mum Samantha Murphy has made a sensational appearance in court.

www.dailymail.co.uk

BBM : Could have been simply a followup appointment with the fracture clinic for eg IMO

His injuries didn't seem to hinder him continuing in his job

 

[Scooby-Doo]

BBM : Could have been simply a followup appointment with the fracture clinic for eg IMO

His injuries didn't seem to hinder him continuing in his job

We don't know if any hindrance has affected his work.

If the reports are correct, there seems to be more serious injuries than going to a fracture clinic

 

[HoneyBunOne]

Gunna hit you with a technicality here.

In his defence, he won't have to prove anything.

True, but the prosecution will bring it up, and it will look damning.

I’ll lay my bet on “in a mad panic after” and that he didn’t feel like his customary sausage & onion on bread at Bunnings on that particular afternoon.

Bloody Bunnings, always seems to get a mention in murder trials. Poor old Robert Bunning would be turning in his grave if he knew.

Why twice?

To see if he had the same reactions in the same places as last time? To see if his story and his placement was the same as last time? If not, they could catch him in a lie? Maybe they have new evidence pointing to a slightly different area and want to see if he gets a bit hot under the collar now they're getting closer? Maybe they're hoping he's at a low enough point to crack this time?

 

[Cliff Hardy]

I think that his defense is going to be
“if he hit Samantha he didn’t know it”
“he remembers maybe hitting an animal while driving”
so they are taking him to the spot where he maybe remembers hitting an animal….

I think this taking him back there is a defense ploy that won’t aid his prosecution

I think they have her DNA inside his vehicle and on his tools and they are going to explain that away (when he was removing kangaroo blood with a rag) from his vehicle
he had no earthly idea it was human blood - he threw the rag back on his tools….

I don’t think they have video of him actually with her as has been previously speculated- because this would be moving more quickly if that was the case.

I think that finding her phone is the most damning piece of evidence so far.

If there was seriously damning evidence on his phone or devices they would be searching for her in a specific area.

He may not be quite as stupid as we think he is. He certainly has gotten lucky in hiding her body to date.

My main question is whether he accidentally hit her and covered it up (very unlikely)
or hit her with malicious intention- either she set him off by reprimanding him possibly or was this pre-meditated assault/ sexual assault and murder?

This journey back to the forest may be to see if his recollection of “possibly hitting an animal” corresponds to a spot where her phone showed trauma.

Maybe his Ute was technologically advanced enough to lend some evidence here to catch him in lies.

The only thing they can say is that someone else picked her up after she was injured etc - I think that without her body a defense team could provide a certain amount of “reasonable doubt” but I think there are other pieces of evidence that it will be really hard to explain.

I also think his close family and his ex gf all think he is 100% guilty
I don’t see any of them speaking up in his defense. They appear to all be repulsed by him after this. I think they realize that his odd/off behavior lent itself to this atrocity- much as Kohberger’s family knew he was guilty

All IMHO

A 'hit Samantha and didn't know it' line of defence doesn't mesh well with the police's earlier public announcement(s) that seemed to amount to 'it wasn't death caused by a vehicle.'

 

[HoneyBunOne]

A 'hit Samantha and didn't know it' line of defence doesn't mesh well with the police's earlier public announcement(s) that seemed to amount to 'it wasn't death caused by a vehicle.'

The quote was:
He said police believed the murder was "a deliberate act" and "not a hit and run".

From this article:

Police to allege Samantha Murphy was murdered in 'deliberate act'

www.9news.com.au

It could have been caused by a vehicle, just not accidental.

 

[Cliff Hardy]

The quote was:
He said police believed the murder was "a deliberate act" and "not a hit and run".

From this article:

Police to allege Samantha Murphy was murdered in 'deliberate act'

www.9news.com.au

It could have been caused by a vehicle, just not accidental.

If it was death caused by vehicle, I wonder how the police can be sure or at least think, it wasn't accidental? I guess possibilities are :

1/ There is a witness to what took place.
2/ What took place was captured digitally.
3/ Evidence at the scene or on PS' vehicle supports that it wasn't accidental.

 

[HoneyBunOne]

If it was death caused by vehicle, I wonder how the police can be sure or at least think, it wasn't accidental? I guess possibilities are :

1/ There is a witness to what took place.
2/ What took place was captured digitally.
3/ Evidence at the scene or on PS' vehicle supports that it wasn't accidental.

My money is on 2.

 

[kurtneverdied]

My money is on 2.

I speculated on this a few pages back saying there must be some solid evidence to confidentiality call it a deliberate act. Think I said must be a witness with him, or dash cam footage retrieved as what else can conclusively prove it was a deliberate act?. The wording means the act of driving into her, not hiding her or anything that happened afterwards like some people think.

 

[sunspun]

Taking him back to Canadian is taking him back to the start, the meeting, the crime.

Both sides may be agreeing that he was there. He’s consented to go with the police to Canadian so there’s probably undeniable evidence of him being in Canadian on the morning of Feb 2nd.

His defence crew might be encouraging his return to Canadian to corroborate his narrative and reconstruct the scene.

Why twice?

Could he have told police he would take them to her body, but then found he was unable to do it, either because he couldn't remember where exactly or possibly because he got cold feet when faced with the actual prospect of essentially confessing to murder?

And then maybe they wanted him to try again, so they took him on another trip.. Do we know if there were more LE searches after his field trips?

 

[BreakingNews]

Could he have told police he would take them to her body, but then found he was unable to do it, either because he couldn't remember where exactly or possibly because he got cold feet when faced with the actual prospect of essentially confessing to murder?

And then maybe they wanted him to try again, so they took him on another trip.. Do we know if there were more LE searches after his field trips?

I'm guessing there probably was more searches. But we are only guessing that LE have 'proof' he was in the area. I'm guessing cctv footage. So take him back to the crime scene as there is proof he was there!!! Or take him back to the area where there is proof that he was there. Maybe he will say he was there, but didn't see SM. MOO.

 

[kurtneverdied]

Will be interesting to see if police have PS phone location from the alleged incident until arrested.

Obviously they had him under surveillance for a while too and be interesting what he did and where he went etc.

They have hours of CTV so I guess would of got some from where he allegedly got his car fixed and detailed.

Obviously what is missing is a location where Samantha is, if he was the one who has hidden her.

Even if he left his phone at home the inactivity for hours compared to his normal routine may leave some suspicion or clues.

Perhaps he was tracked somewhere but couldn't be pinpointed to a smaller area or it was where she was and she was moved.

Hoping the police have some idea where she is as there was a long time for him or someone to move her anywhere really and I'm praying they didn't do a good job at it so she can be found soon.

 

[Spectrix]

Think I said must be a witness with him, or dash cam footage retrieved as what else can conclusively prove it was a deliberate act?. The wording means the act of driving into her, not hiding her or anything that happened afterwards like some people think.

The wording suggests there was a deliberate act to end her life, it does not specify how.
We suspect that there was a vehicle incident due to a crash reconstruction expert being called as a witness.
We don't know if a collision caused her death. For instance the alleged deliberate act could have been to cover up a collision, given that PS was likely driving under the influence and has prior convictions for the same.

Having said that, the wording is very interesting. They don't typically describe murder as a 'deliberate act' because the deliberate part is assumed.

Deliberately driving at a runner and killing them would be murder. Running them down by accident while intoxicated might be manslaughter. It's possible that pleading not guilty to murder is in the hope attracting the lesser charge.

But if that was the case, why would he refuse to give up the location of the body? That part doesn't make any sense to me, my thoughts have gone full circle and I'm back to square one again .

 

[Cliff Hardy]

The terminology the police used seems to be doing all our heads in, but regardless of the specific cause of death, her body has obviously been removed from the scene. Presumably but not definitely, by PS himself.

Why would PS go to the length of moving and hiding Samantha's body and no commenting for 15 months so far, whilst incarcerated, if it was anything other than murder? If he or his legals genuinely believed it was anything less than murder and the facts supported that, surely they would be cooperating?