Quite likely both.Considering the woman was attacked by an alleged perp who is male - I suspect the sexual motive.
JMO
Quite likely both.Considering the woman was attacked by an alleged perp who is male - I suspect the sexual motive.
JMO
In high profile cases like the Baden Clay trial, a second court room was opened for overflow public and televised from the main court room. The media had a seperate room also. Standard court room rules applied.Australia has not embraced live streaming of court cases.. .... It will, one day. I am sure. Certainly, teleconferencing and most court cases now are between the Remand centre and the court, via zoom or something.. like a Telehealth call. But not for the public viewing, but it has always been that one can attend court on any day one wishes. Of course, if' it's a high profile case, there is a queue, but the staff are professional at sorting this out.
Behaviour in the court isn't optional, there are certain procedures and processes to adhere to. Once I got caught up in a coughing fit, and was escorted, gently, yet firmly to a place outside the court and bought water , tea, and some sort of eucalyptus lolly, and kleenex... Clothing isn't optional, either, a jacket, nothing decollee, etc... No phones, naturally. Shoes, of course.
What always happens, in every state in AU, in a Supreme Court case, the judge's summing up ( often quite lengthy and always a real pleasure to listen to a judge's grasp of the language and it's various forms, ) which is a precis of the case just heard, and then his / her sentence, and his reasons for the sentence.. always, these are videoed and left up for a short time so every one can see the summing up and judgement.
Wow, the commissioner here is straight up. They’ve seen it. It’s been filmed and they have watched it and that’s how they’re so sure. A car is involved but there’s far more to it. They’ve got this.Where did you find that quote? Can you link that please?
At the press conference, the police chief commissioner was very clear that he could only say "This was a deliberate attack", and that's because that's what a charge of murder, by definition, means.
During the media questioning, they lobbed many speculative questions about the crime, to all of which he answerered that he was not going to discuss the case, only reiterate that 'this was a deliberate attack'.
For example, at 9:42 of the linked video, a journalist asks, "are police going to allege this was a hit and run". He says, "No" and waits for the next question.
I would recommend viewing this short video in order to appreciate the difference between what the police very carefully and precisely say, versus how those words may be carelessly spun or misquoted elsewhere.
JMO
The PC said several times "a deliberate attack", and once he said: "a deliberate attack, which resulted in murder".Where did you find that quote? Can you link that please?
At the press conference, the police chief commissioner was very clear that he could only say "This was a deliberate attack", and that's because that's what a charge of murder, by definition, means.
During the media questioning, they lobbed many speculative questions about the crime, to all of which he answerered that he was not going to discuss the case, only reiterate that 'this was a deliberate attack'.
For example, at 9:42 of the linked video, a journalist asks, "are police going to allege this was a hit and run". He says, "No" and waits for the next question.
I would recommend viewing this short video in order to appreciate the difference between what the police very carefully and precisely say, versus how those words may be carelessly spun or misquoted elsewhere.
JMO
Could he make it any clearer?? could he have been more precise?? he laid it out, really...Wow, the commissioner here is straight up. They’ve seen it. It’s been filmed and they have watched it and that’s how they’re so sure. A car is involved but there’s far more to it. They’ve got this.
Seemingly I did stop viewing the video a bit too early. That's unbelievable, omG.Wow, the commissioner here is straight up. They’ve seen it. It’s been filmed and they have watched it and that’s how they’re so sure. A car is involved but there’s far more to it. They’ve got this.
Could be one and the same….Could he make it any clearer?? could he have been more precise?? he laid it out, really...
Worth remembering that VICPOL drew up the charge of murder, went to the home at 6am, arrested him on the charge of murder, THEN searched vehicles, places, toolboxes, cars, trucks, quadbikes, etc etc etc... they had enough to lay the charge before his place was searched.. ..
Also, he mentioned the Western Division.. that's where one of those charges from the other day was initially instigated from/
Hi wulf-moon, well actually I was replying to Dotta's post #807, where she gave it as her opinion that the motive was sexual, given that it was a male attack on a woman. She was responding to my post #770, where I gave my opinion that it was a "thrill kill". But then in response to Dotta, in #827, I said that it could likely be both. Which it could. We shall see.Kemug, I am sorry for asking this question but what do you base your 'sexual motive' on? It is in consideration to your response to the quoted. MOO
Cedars:Wow, the commissioner here is straight up. They’ve seen it. It’s been filmed and they have watched it and that’s how they’re so sure. A car is involved but there’s far more to it. They’ve got this.
Watch the Commissioner. It hits you so clearly.Cedars:
'At the press conference, the police chief commissioner was very clear that he could only say "This was a deliberate attack", and that's because that's what a charge of murder, by definition, means'
Rocket333:
'Wow, the commissioner here is straight up. They’ve seen it. It’s been filmed and they have watched it and that’s how they’re so sure. A car is involved but there’s far more to it. They’ve got this.'
There is a main section that we don't know but it is a very good start. I wonder where the LE caught the actual act on footage and how long it took to get that because after that they observed the alleged perp. for 2 weeks. I do not believe that this area has been clearly identified even with all of the movements provided by the LE except for gridded areas of search and LE requests for footage.
A tradie is usually fully equipped ready-to-go with their tools and I've already covered this in one of my previous posts.
At some stage the alleged perp. may have allegedly disabled and destroyed all monitoring devices. Perhaps not. It would appear that LE do not have all ground covered in transit mode of the alleged perp. and these are the murky areas. MOO
Is it possible that the alleged perpetrator took Sam’s phone to the Scotsburn house sitting property (or a known property nearby) and briefly switched it on resulting in the possible 5pm ping?
The Commissioner refers to the accused as a “Scotsburn man”. The accused’s family home is at Mt Clear but the house sitting property is at Scotsburn. Why though would you let SM’s phone ping so close to home (Buninyong looks to be only about 4 to 5 k’s from the Scotsburn house). Seems counter intuitive, unless it was an error.