Australia Samantha Murphy, 51, last seen leaving her property to go for a run in the Canadian State Forest, Ballarat 100km NW of Melbourne, 4 Feb 2024 #6

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does intentionally, deliberately, driving under the influence meet the definition of murder? Reckless indifference to life?
If the loss of life resulted from intent, then yes. So if he deliberately sped up when he saw her or reversed so he would get her. If he was ‘only’ driving under the influence and accidentally hit her it would be classified as ‘manslaughter’ to my knowledge (plus then interfering with a corpse as he moved the body)
 
Claiming mental health is in vogue - the get out of jail free card of recent times! This one always comes to mind whenever I hear mental health card being pulled Accused killer of homeless man was popular grammar boy who changed on drugs

Most people in prison suffer from mental health issues so it’s certainly not a get out of jail free card. Mental illness does come into play when charging and sentencing though because it alters the intent and also the court does need to be notified of their issues so they can continue treatment or be assessed in remand.
 
I understand why people are always shocked when someone who has committed a heinous crime looks just like the boy next door. We really, really want the monsters to look like monsters. If they do, we can be sure we'd recognize them right away and run the other way. "No way would that monster have gotten me," we think, "I'd have recognized him for what he was right away!"

It's very, very uncomfortable to look at someone who has done something horrific and realize how much he looks like us, or like someone we love and trust, and have to confront the sobering reality that we would probably not have run the other way at all, and would have suffered the same fate as anyone else.

THIS.

I'm not sure if it was as calculated and cunning as some have suggested. I feel it was an impulsive decision and he didn't think of the consequences. Devastating either way.

We don't know, basically. We don't have the facts. I think it's easy to try to 'reduce' the horror in our own minds. The courts will be the ones weighing these things up based on the info they have.

The charge is murder which means there is enough to suggest this was involving intent and action.

Impulsive decisions can occur on top of planning/calculations. Especially with substances on board. Not thinking about the consequences doesn't mean it can't also involve planning or prior surveillance.
 
Possibly because the Major Collision Investigation Unit were involved in the targeted search and police mentioning a damaged car in the presser.
I've seen Major Collision unit involved in air crash stuff, so that doesn't signify a lot, ...it is a matter of the actual charge that , to me, nullifies the concept of it being a collision event. Murder, particularly since they were not known to each other, ( which brings a whole other load of factors into the charge itself ) implies a certain person to person, shirtfront to shirtfront , face to face aura, an event not separated by a metal vehicle, enclosed in glass, but right up into the personal realm.

There are provisions for charging a person with vehicular death, but they were not used by VICPOL.

So I just wondered, is all....... I don't doubt that Major Col have a part to play, but not in the sense of it being a collision event, I don't think..
 
I've seen Major Collision unit involved in air crash stuff, so that doesn't signify a lot, ...it is a matter of the actual charge that , to me, nullifies the concept of it being a collision event. Murder, particularly since they were not known to each other, ( which brings a whole other load of factors into the charge itself ) implies a certain person to person, shirtfront to shirtfront , face to face aura, an event not separated by a metal vehicle, enclosed in glass, but right up into the personal realm.

There are provisions for charging a person with vehicular death, but they were not used by VICPOL.

So I just wondered, is all....... I don't doubt that Major Col have a part to play, but not in the sense of it being a collision event, I don't think..

agree.

I get a sense from the chief commissioner press conference that the murder was "on foot" and a vehicle was involved relating to movement / disposal / injury. MOO.
 
Most people in prison suffer from mental health issues so it’s certainly not a get out of jail free card. Mental illness does come into play when charging and sentencing though because it alters the intent and also the court does need to be notified of their issues so they can continue treatment or be assessed in remand.
I've always thought it a given that someone has a mental illness if you murder someone or commit serious crimes...
 
I just don't know where the premise of her being hit by a car has come from. Most likely, he , at some stage, used a car to remove her body from the murder site at Mt Clear ( that's where VICPOL say she was murdered that Sunday morning) because her body is not , plainly, at Mt Clear. That is a given, her body is missing. Logically, he didn't carry her away on his shoulders. But where does the claim of this being some sort of collision event come from?
Because of the sustained and repeated call outs for info/dashcam from LE about a damaged car between 7AM-7PM. Its one of many theories that gained a lot of traction. It doesn't mean there was a collision with Sam, it might've been on trying to exit the area unseen and hitting a fence or ploughing through a gate.
 
Does intentionally, deliberately, driving under the influence meet the definition of murder? Reckless indifference to life?

Detectives from the missing persons squad arrested Stephenson, who they said was not linked to the Murphy family, at about 6am on Wednesday. “We are alleging a deliberate attack that has caused the death of Samantha,” the police commissioner, Shane Patton, told reporters.
 
Mainly just because he looks very similar in photos to other players down at my son’s local football club. I’m not saying he hasn’t done it, just that it’s quite scary that if I saw him I wouldn’t ever think twice myself that he would be capable of murdering someone. More just the fact that I struggle to understand why someone would do such a thing. It also opens my eyes to the fact that you just can’t judge a book by its cover.
Appearances can be very deceiving, as this case has strikingly demonstrated. Our perception of how another appears, informed as it is by life experiences, familial and societal stereotypes, can lead to (possibly dangerous) assumptions.

IMO Mick Murphy, Samantha's husband, has been in the sights of many as the most likely perpetrator of Samantha's demise, based partially on certain "appearances" (as stated) including:
  • his attire at the press conference
  • his mention of food whilst thanking supporters for their largesse and kindness
  • his interaction with his daughter being "off"
  • he was smiling whilst talking to a police officer
to name just a few...

The appearance of the alleged perpetrator who looks like many at the local footy club (paraphrasing)?
I'm not sure how they look, but IMO could be tall, athletic build, up for a laugh, possibly some alcohol nearby, with mates...

Most of us thankfully, will never have to experience anything like the pressure which Mick Murphy has IMO been enduring since Samantha's disappearance. Not knowing what on earth has happened to his wife would be bad enough. Seeing the grief and pain of his children, and trying to support them, when the one thing they want is for their mum to walk through the door, would be agonising.

After speaking at the first press conference, IMO he would have realised very quickly that everything he said would be subjected to intense scrutiny, (along with everything he wore), and that many were now labelling him as a wife-murderer.

IMO, given the pressure he must have been experiencing (ie a living hell), he has handled his public appearances with considerable grace. MOO
 
agree.

I get a sense from the chief commissioner press conference that the murder was "on foot" and a vehicle was involved relating to movement / disposal / injury. MOO.
I hope we again hear from Chief Commissioner Shane Patton soon.
He provides info, often to stop unwanted/harmful speculation by the public.
However, as investigations are continuing, we may not hear any more, for some time.

I guess we'll continue speculating of scenarios that may apply.
 
So, do they have the Apple Watch? Is it dead or something and they can't track it? I may have missed this part of the discussion.
No idea. In this day and age, you probably wouldn't need it. The data would be uploaded to one of many apps in real time and then law enforcement would be able to access that data without needing the watch, with the correct permissions, at some point... I assume
 
No idea. In this day and age, you probably wouldn't need it. The data would be uploaded to one of many apps in real time and then law enforcement would be able to access that data without needing the watch, with the correct permissions, at some point... I assume
This seems like it would be one of my first steps, but I know that Australia has some strict privacy laws.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
200
Guests online
2,310
Total visitors
2,510

Forum statistics

Threads
594,274
Messages
18,001,689
Members
229,357
Latest member
611CLE
Back
Top