GUILTY Australia - Andrew, 45, Rose, 44, & Chantelle Rowe, 16, slain, Kapunda, 8 Nov 2010 #3

[Mrs G Norris]

In reference to cuts on the hands I found this quote from a news article:

http://www.crimecasefiles.com/forum/australian-crime-news/22843-three-bodies-found-at-kapunda-2.html (fourth article down in the thread)



Perhaps the person was actually the accused? Although it says that he had been ruled out as a suspect it is possible that they said that to mislead the accused into thinking he was safe?

Yes, I wondered about that too....he said he cut his hands at work yes, isn't that what the SIL said about workers at the mechanics too, that they often cut themselves at work so it was no unusual?

 

[nobody11]

with what we know as 'facts' does anyone think he isnt guilty??

I am not convinced, there is doubt there, but we don't really know many facts at all

 

[Bombil]

Yes, of course the police would have looked at his arms!
But I do not think that story about him having cuts on his arms was factual.
Only one person told that story, and she hasn't been back.

I am pretty sure that sb9257 was the poster of this info and she made posts to this thread yesterday:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - The bodies of Chantelle Rowe, 16, and her parents found murdered in their home - 3 -

 

[midsommer]

Perhaps they did see those cuts earlier....but decided to play along with his explanation while waiting for the DNA and keep him under 'observation'.

Sorry, but I can't believe the police could or would do that, Mrs G.

If they had suspected he was a person who had brutally butchered 3 people, I do not think it is even remotely conceivable that they would let him go about his daily business.

They would have had him in for questioning the moment they suspected something.

They would have worried he was a danger to others, a flight and and/or a suicide risk.

It is absolutely out of the question that they would have just sat back, twiddling their thumbs and watching him while they waited for tests to come back.

 

[nobody11]

Yes, of course the police would have looked at his arms!
But I do not think that story about him having cuts on his arms was factual.
Only one person told that story, and she hasn't been back.

I agree 100% if they had earlier suspicion with such evidence such as very bad slashes on his arms the community would be in an uproar. I personally don't think the slashes are there

 

[asha1972]

QUOTE FROM MUM73 "I'm not sure if anyone else has thought along the same lines, but of all the FB pages I saw, only one leaves me with a feeling that something is not quite right...and it's not the neighbour...and it's more about what's not there...not saying it's related to the crime, but it seems very...odd...this person may also be connected to the neighbour."

if you are thinking what i have thought also, its a very good question. if you look at that FB profile, this person seems to have somewhat broadcast LOUDLY and counted down the weeks to a trip whereas in the past they didn't....also wanted to get rid of a dog they had only just got...

gee i feel terrible even questioning this person, but it has happened before.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Sorry, but I can't believe the police could or would do that, Mrs G.

If they had suspected he was a person who had brutally butchered 3 people, I do not think it is even remotely conceivable that they would let him go about his daily business.

They would have had him in for questioning the moment they suspected something.

They would have worried he was a danger to others, a flight and and/or a suicide risk.

It is absolutely out of the question that they would have just sat back, twiddling their thumbs and watching him while they waited for tests to come back.

Sometimes they have no choice until they have enough evidence to make an arrest unfortunately....although they may have been unsure until the DNA, or of course not looked at his arms after all.

 

[helloppl]

QUOTE FROM MUM73 "I'm not sure if anyone else has thought along the same lines, but of all the FB pages I saw, only one leaves me with a feeling that something is not quite right...and it's not the neighbour...and it's more about what's not there...not saying it's related to the crime, but it seems very...odd...this person may also be connected to the neighbour."

if you are thinking what i have thought also, its a very good question. if you look at that FB profile, this person seems to have somewhat broadcast LOUDLY and counted down the weeks to a trip whereas in the past they didn't....also wanted to get rid of a dog they had only just got...

gee i feel terrible even questioning this person, but it has happened before.

I know who you're talking about, and quite obviously he has his privacy settings set so that you can't see any wall posts by other people, unless you are his FB friend. That one particular post at the very top of his screen is a tagged status. she must have written a status and tagged him in it, which is a different story. If you go down the page, can u see any posts by people other than his own?

 

[ta001]

I believe that was a mis-identifiacation.

That person who was on his own at the shrine, with the hooded jacket on and red underpants (you could see them when he bent down lol) was the brother.

He visited very early in the morning, as you can see from the shadows, and it was cold at that time.

I don't think it was his brother, I think it was the accused. He's wearing the same red sydney swans tshirt (not red underwear) that is in all his other photos & his hair is darker than his brother's hair.

Besides back in the early days (before there were Fbook deletions) one of his mates said that the accused visited CR's alleged boyfriend after the event & also visited the shrine to pay his respects

 

[midsommer]

Mum73 - you have reiterated the concerns I have about this case and this supect.

As for the neighbour's FB post, I have a save copy of the html file with that post.

It is odd that the neighbour wrote it the way he did and easy to see why the police initially jumped on that as sounding confessional.

 

[singers]

I'm wondering how the police could know that the accused was at the house up to an hour after the killing. What do you think he was doing?

I am wondering if he was removing evidence, washing any finger prints or handprints. He could also have deleted text messages and social networking private messages.

I'm wondering what evidence the police found to be able to say he was there up to an hour after the victims died.

 

[ta001]

I just have to say, I appreciate all the hard work that everyone is putting into this, and I know it's called 'websleuths' for a reason. But I really think we should stop giving theories into sex etc. You are going by a website that seems to me is Scottish news articles typed second hand. Has anyone seen the original article? But nonetheless, I think if Chantelle was there watching over, she'd would've felt touched seeing all you care so much, but when you start talking about sex and how she probably had consensual sex etc, could you imagine how much that would hurt? To see people implying that you had sexual relations with your killer? To me that's going beyond websleuthing, and is very very offensive to her memory. But I am new to this so forgive me if I am overreacting. I just feel very sad about this case.

I agree that we shouldn't make assumptions on this as there has been no official confirmation that any sexual act occurred - male DNA doesn't mean semen. A person's sex can be determined from other tissue or blood. Also, although the 2 posts that mentioned a surpressed rape charge were very convincing we don't know that it's fact. I mean no disrespect to those who posted about the prior court appearance - It was good to read your posts prior to the moderators getting to it.

I'm just hope on Wed they release a bit more information (other than the accused's name)...I have so many other questions...

 

[singers]

i live in kapunda, he wears either the swans red shirt or the scottish soccer shirt lol

Thanks for the info, a few of us said in earlier threads about him being a little obsessive. Given his family life and back ground I can see how he could crack.

 

[midsommer]

QUOTE FROM MUM73 "I'm not sure if anyone else has thought along the same lines, but of all the FB pages I saw, only one leaves me with a feeling that something is not quite right...and it's not the neighbour...and it's more about what's not there...not saying it's related to the crime, but it seems very...odd...this person may also be connected to the neighbour."

if you are thinking what i have thought also, its a very good question. if you look at that FB profile, this person seems to have somewhat broadcast LOUDLY and counted down the weeks to a trip whereas in the past they didn't....also wanted to get rid of a dog they had only just got...

gee i feel terrible even questioning this person, but it has happened before.

I need to clear this up.

The person who lives diagonally behind, who made the FB post and had his washingmachine searched is NOT the brother. He is a friend of the brother on FB.

I have saved a copy of his post.
UsingWhite Pages I searched his address by his surname and confirmed where he lives.

<modsnip: inviting>

 

[Mrs G Norris]

I'm wondering how the police could know that the accused was at the house up to an hour after the killing. What do you think he was doing?

Dread finding out to be honest....

I am wondering if he was removing evidence, washing any finger prints or handprints. He could also have deleted text messages and social networking private messages.

Brilliantly thanks to computer forensics, any attempt to delete text messages and PMs is useless as they remain on the hard drive.

I'm wondering what evidence the police found to be able to say he was there up to an hour after the victims died.

One way they can tell how long he was in the house after the murders by looking at disturbed blood drops, say he steps in some blood or tries to wipe some, or moves a body for instance and disturbs it that way they can tell how long it was after that blood was first spilt, due to drying coagulation etc....I am thinking he possibly stepped on some blood as he was leaving since he left a trail of bloody footprints.

 

[midsommer]

I'm wondering how the police could know that the accused was at the house up to an hour after the killing. What do you think he was doing?

I am wondering if he was removing evidence, washing any finger prints or handprints. He could also have deleted text messages and social networking private messages.

I'm wondering what evidence the police found to be able to say he was there up to an hour after the victims died.

I think the police were saying the the murderer was there for an hour because of the arrangement of the bodies.

Someone said that the bodies were arranged or staged in some way, and that this was the evidence that caused the gasp in the court.

The murderer had to spend time doing whatever it was he did after killing the family.

I don't think they mean they have proof that the suspect was there, just that the murderer was there (they may or may not be the same people).

 

[ta001]

if you see him around the place you'd know that it is his favourite sydney swans shirt - also the shoes he is wearing are his obsession

And the ears are quite distinctive...

 

[Bombil]

I'm wondering how the police could know that the accused was at the house up to an hour after the killing. What do you think he was doing?

I am wondering if he was removing evidence, washing any finger prints or handprints. He could also have deleted text messages and social networking private messages.

I'm wondering what evidence the police found to be able to say he was there up to an hour after the victims died.

I am not sure where the info that he had spent up to an hour in the house has come from. I do recall reading it somewhere but not sure if it has been published by the media or simply posted here.

I do know they they gave an hour timeframe within which the murders may have occured (between midnight and 1am from memory) but that doesn't necessarily mean that he spent an hour there, but could be because it can be extremely difficult to pin point an exact time of death from forensics alone?

Having said that, I suppose they would know the exact time based on the neighbours recollection of when he heard the screams? But I think the neighbour only came forward several days later, and most likely after the police had published an approximate time of death? Anyway, what I am saying is that the idea that the accused spent an hour at the house could be a misnomer based on the misinterpretation of the range given in the original estimate of the time of death?

 

[ta001]

Were they number 11 or 9?

And all I could find about the houses was this (they were in a unit with similar specs as surrounding houses):

Spoiler

No 13

 

[singers]

I am not sure where the info that he had spent up to an hour in the house has come from. I do recall reading it somewhere but not sure if it has been published by the media or simply posted here.

I do know they they gave an hour timeframe within which the murders may have occured (between midnight and 1am from memory) but that doesn't necessarily mean that he spent an hour there, but could be because it can be extremely difficult to pin point an exact time of death from forensics alone?

Having said that, I suppose they would know the exact time based on the neighbours recollection of when he heard the screams? But I think the neighbour only came forward several days later, and most likely after the police had published an approximate time of death? Anyway, what I am saying is that the idea that the accused spent an hour at the house could be a misnomer based on the misinterpretation of the range given in the original estimate of the time of death?

Perhaps you are right. I thought it was published in the media, but don't have time to go back and sift through. It could just be assumption.

I was just thinking that given he was obsessed with the victim there may be many smses and private messages on computers.