- Joined
- Oct 8, 2022
- Messages
- 12,068
- Reaction score
- 118,771
DBM
Last edited:
Thanks for sharing this Troops.Nice little twist going on here, Marg.. A Basha hearing is about wanting to cross examine a witness ( by the defence ) on the grounds of unfairness etc, before it goes to trial.
''''A Basha inquiry arises from the case of R v Basha (1989) 39 A Crim R 337, and as set out by Hamill J in the case of Qaumi (below), a Basha inquiry arises in situations where there is potential unfairness to an accused such as:
- Unserved statement/s of a witness;
- Ambiguity within the prosecution brief; and
- No committal hearing
The procedure is that a potential witness is called for cross-examination on a particular issue in the absence of the jury before potentially being called to give evidence before the jury. '''
Be very interesting to find out who this particular witness is, that Mr Stephenson and his barristers have taken such firm umbrage at!
If we go back, VICPOL put up 9 witnesses, I have to go back to check. but I think thats about right, .... among those are the techie chaps , who , in my opinion, hold some ace cards in this deck, hope it is not them!! wellllll we wait and see...
Thanks Marg, I ran out of time to check it , 8 witnesses.. ( we do not know how many , if any, Stephenson has put up) ... let's just assume that it is NOT the tech blokes.. on the grounds that they would automatically be checked for any ambiguity... . by the DPP. ...Certainly, it is someone the defence has , at this stage, after all this time, found a crack in the window!Thanks for sharing this Troops.
You are spot on - back in April of this year there were 8 proposed witnesses……
Crash expert and DNA expert to be called in Samantha Murphy murder trial
“Prosecutor Raymond Gibson KC said during a court date for Stephenson in February this year, that police members and a DNA expert were among their list of eight proposed witnesses.
He said road crash reconstruction expert Robert Hay, a digital data expert, and phone data specialist Matthew Sorrell would be among them.”
![]()
Major update in search for Samantha Murphy
The 51-year-old mum was last seen leaving her home for a run in February last year.7news.com.au
Nice little twist going on here, Marg.. A Basha hearing is about wanting to cross examine a witness ( by the defence ) on the grounds of unfairness etc, before it goes to trial.
''''A Basha inquiry arises from the case of R v Basha (1989) 39 A Crim R 337, and as set out by Hamill J in the case of Qaumi (below), a Basha inquiry arises in situations where there is potential unfairness to an accused such as:
- Unserved statement/s of a witness;
- Ambiguity within the prosecution brief; and
- No committal hearing
The procedure is that a potential witness is called for cross-examination on a particular issue in the absence of the jury before potentially being called to give evidence before the jury. '''
Be very interesting to find out who this particular witness is, that Mr Stephenson and his barristers have taken such firm umbrage at!
If we go back, VICPOL put up 9 witnesses, I have to go back to check. but I think thats about right, .... among those are the techie chaps , who , in my opinion, hold some ace cards in this deck, hope it is not them!! wellllll we wait and see...
Usually, one of the main reasons why a tech witness is put in this position, is because the defence has not been able to match the expertise to a satisfactory level. That is, the expert is one of a kind, and no comparable testimony to debunk it is available. OR, that the expert in question has questionable qualifications, that do not meet court specifications, ( rare rare rare with the Victorian DPP) OR ( fill in blank!!).....The expert whose name was left off previous reports is digital data expert, Jo Parkin. Also this article adds that a DNA expert will also be a witness, but haven’t given their name.
Road expert and digital forensic specialists to be called in Samantha Murphy trial
February 26, 2025
“Key expert witnesses in road, digital forensics, DNA and phone data are expected to give evidence at the upcoming trial of the man accused of murdering Samantha Murphy.
“A brief hearing on Wednesday before Judicial Registrar Tim Freeman heard about the experts and their specialities for the first time.
They include road reconstructionist Robert Hay, digital data expert Jo Parkin and phone data specialist Matthew Sorell.”
![]()
Road expert and digital forensic specialists to be called in Samantha Murphy trial
Prosecutors have begun outlining the key experts they will rely on in the case of Patrick Orren Stephenson, who has pleaded not guilty to murdering the Ballarat mum.www.theage.com.au
Thanks for providing this Marg. . so much time has gone by that a refresher is very much needed / appreciatedThe expert whose name was left off previous reports is digital data expert, Jo Parkin. Also this article adds that a DNA expert will also be a witness, but haven’t given their name.
Road expert and digital forensic specialists to be called in Samantha Murphy trial
February 26, 2025
“Key expert witnesses in road, digital forensics, DNA and phone data are expected to give evidence at the upcoming trial of the man accused of murdering Samantha Murphy.
“A brief hearing on Wednesday before Judicial Registrar Tim Freeman heard about the experts and their specialities for the first time.
They include road reconstructionist Robert Hay, digital data expert Jo Parkin and phone data specialist Matthew Sorell.”
![]()
Road expert and digital forensic specialists to be called in Samantha Murphy trial
Prosecutors have begun outlining the key experts they will rely on in the case of Patrick Orren Stephenson, who has pleaded not guilty to murdering the Ballarat mum.www.theage.com.au
Sorry Trooper, I just posted a similar thought at the same time.It could be the DNA geek... !! Way back there was turmoil and trouble re Bradley Murdoch and the lone tiny spot of Joanne Lees blood on an old T-shirt of his, no other explanation other than Joanne's story could account for it. ( Way before Basha stuff ) (((Murdoch was fund guilty, life sentence)))
Using Locard's principle, 'every contact leaves a trace'.. we don't know what traces he left of himself on Mrs Murphy, ( no body available) but perhaps Mrs Murphy left a trace of herself on him and his belongings... enter the DNA boffins...
The Prosecution has not named this DNA witness, the defence would know who it is, due to disclosure but they are not allowed to publish the name either, if the prosecution nixes it.
Never say never, @Dotta. The same thing was said about the murderer of Kaylee, Maddie, Xana and Ethan in Idaho. Of course, the killer didn’t transport anyone in his car, but many a Websleuther was convinced that blood or hair from the bloody scene would be found there. The fact that it wasn’t fueled doubt in a few here and added to the arsenal of many a conspiracy theorist outside of Websleuths.IMO
If the perp allegedly transported the victim in his car,
there must have been, even the tiniest, DNA of the victim there.
A single hair, a drop of blood, touch sweat DNA, fibre of clothing... anything ....
tucked there somewhere.
Not everything can be cleaned,
even if perp can be sure the vehicle was cleaned thoroughly.
Sarah E.'s drops of blood were found in Wayne C's car - and he was a cop.
JMO
I think I made a point of this on that thread when speculating on possible defense strategies. At that time BK's connection to the crime was limited to DNA on a clasp from a knife sheath and a similar looking car. If that information could have been suppressed on a technicality of some sort (and it often is) then the case was more circumstantial and the defense could have argued how difficult it would be to leave no trace evidence in BK's car or in his apartment as evidence of his innocence. This turned out not to be the case because he plead guilty and as we have since learned there was much more evidence of his connection to these victims in addition to his DNA.Never say never, @Dotta. The same thing was said about the murderer of Kaylee, Maddie, Xana and Ethan in Idaho. Of course, the killer didn’t transport anyone in his car, but many a Websleuther was convinced that blood or hair from the bloody scene would be found there. The fact that it wasn’t fueled doubt in a few here and added to the arsenal of many a conspiracy theorist outside of Websleuths.
IMO
Agree, Ive long thought that to charge him with murder, they likely have the weapon, with DNA linking him to Samantha.Thanks for providing this Marg. . so much time has gone by that a refresher is very much needed / appreciated
The big thing that struck me was the inclusion of an expert witness in DNA, as I obviously missed this previously, and in itself speaks volumes - for me it suggests that Samantha’s DNA must have been detected ‘in linkage’ to PS (either car, clothing, tools etc )
JMO