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 #8

[Nifty]

Interesting reading a previous article ..

While not directly stated, Superintendent Hatt suggested police believed whoever helped Ms Murphy disappear had specifically targeted her.

I still think, there is more to this....

And possibly other people of interest / suspect that police are watching closely as not to scare them

There has been a good job of hiding SM's body

It's gone very quiet again, so something could be happening

Questions police refuse to answer about Samantha Murphy mystery

Detectives leading the investigation into the disappearance of mother-of-three Samantha Murphy are holding onto clues they believe will solve the mystery.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[drsleuth]

Unless they find Sam's body , I don't think we will hear much at all until the next court date.

Or unless the police need the public's help..........IMO

 

[BreakingNews]

Do priors come into play during sentencing though?

Yes into sentencing. Just NOT in jury trials. Jurors can only consider the current crime/s. No priors can be raised until after a jury makes a decision. If a guilty plea is entered into, no jury is involved, so priors can be raised. It's all about granting a fair trial in front of a jury panel.

 

[Deleted member 340727]

Interesting reading a previous article ..

While not directly stated, Superintendent Hatt suggested police believed whoever helped Ms Murphy disappear had specifically targeted her.

I still think, there is more to this....

And possibly other people of interest / suspect that police are watching closely as not to scare them

There has been a good job of hiding SM's body

It's gone very quiet again, so something could be happening

Questions police refuse to answer about Samantha Murphy mystery

Detectives leading the investigation into the disappearance of mother-of-three Samantha Murphy are holding onto clues they believe will solve the mystery.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Nifty this article is the DM 26 February 2024
: Missing Persons Unit Superintendent Mark Hatt. Should we place any emphasis on the content given what the State Commissioner Shane Patton has stated in a press conference after this date eliminating MM and other narratives?

And do you believe we should leave all matters on the table?

All suspected and allegedly MOO

 

[Nifty]

Nifty this article is the DM 26 February 2024
: Missing Persons Unit Superintendent Mark Hatt. Should we place any emphasis on the content given what the State Commissioner Shane Patton has stated in a press conference after this date eliminating MM and other narratives?

And do you believe we should leave all matters on the table?

All suspected and allegedly MOO

I have an open mind on this...

I think there could be more to it

I also find it extremely odd, why the police have given MM the cold shoulder all of a sudden

And why he turns up only when police make a big media release when they are searching in an area for SM body

And he quietly drives around, instead of getting out of his vehicle and chatting when police are finishing up

Probably all innocent, but to me a bit strange

Everything will come out soon

 

[BGirl88]

I have an open mind on this...

I think there could be more to it

I also find it extremely odd, why the police have given MM the cold shoulder all of a sudden

And why he turns up only when police make a big media release when they are searching in an area for SM body

And he quietly drives around, instead of getting out of his vehicle and chatting when police are finishing up

Probably all innocent, but to me a bit strange

Everything will come out soon

We also don’t know if that’s truly what happened - it’s just what the DM reported. For all we know, he may have been speaking with LE earlier in the day. IMO

 

[Nifty]

We also don’t know if that’s truly what happened - it’s just what the DM reported. For all we know, he may have been speaking with LE earlier in the day. IMO

MM has mentioned it in other news outlets

And it's been quoted by him

 

[HoneyBunOne]

But he did not go to trial. So no priors needed to be withheld.

I meant in sentencing once guilt has been established.

HB1, there is a huge difference in taking into account priors. If the accused is pleading not guilty and the case goes to trial, priors are not raised. The jury's job is to determine guilt on the current charge/s only. This is to ensure a fair trial of the current charge/s. It is after the jury makes its decision can a judge bring up priors when sentencing. However if the accused pleads guilty, the priors can be raised. It's all about a fair trial and not swaying a jury on anything other than the current charge/s.

I understand it can sway a jury unfairly, but when it comes to sentencing a guilty party it has huge relevance. An indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour, especially when that behaviour repeats time and time again.

 

[Dr Samoht]

I have an open mind on this...

I think there could be more to it

I also find it extremely odd, why the police have given MM the cold shoulder all of a sudden

And why he turns up only when police make a big media release when they are searching in an area for SM body

And he quietly drives around, instead of getting out of his vehicle and chatting when police are finishing up

Probably all innocent, but to me a bit strange

Everything will come out soon

I note the ‘Ground Crew Samantha Murphy ‘ fb group were out searching yesterday ( under the guidance of noted Jake Cassar) search area included Brennans Rd Durham Lead , just south of the Buninyong area searched by VicPol just over a week ago .
Another search by this group in the Buninyong area is underway atm .

 

[Trooper]

I meant in sentencing once guilt has been established.

I understand it can sway a jury unfairly, but when it comes to sentencing a guilty party it has huge relevance. An indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour, especially when that behaviour repeats time and time again.

The judge in Victoria , and I do think in SA, and NSW, can bring in matters during sentencing that are related to the case underway... the matters have to show a tendency, an established habit, a preference, perhaps, a certain mindset... , eg. the Judge can't bring in the parking tickets he got back in 2010, or the time he rode the #96 tram without a ticket , or got sprung shoplifting socks and underwear from Myers, etc,.

But he can bring in the time he pushed and shoved a woman at St Kilda Beach, , that unprovoked attack on a woman outside a nightclub, or the punches he threw at a group of young women at Flinders St Station, all of which , say, he was convicted of, served time, and is currently on parole for..... this sort of thing, if the case is , say, ,murder of a woman.

 

[SouthAussie]

The judge in Victoria , and I do think in SA, and NSW, can bring in matters during sentencing that are related to the case underway... the matters have to show a tendency, an established habit, a preference, perhaps, a certain mindset... , eg. the Judge can't bring in the parking tickets he got back in 2010, or the time he rode the #96 tram without a ticket , or got sprung shoplifting socks and underwear from Myers, etc,.

But he can bring in the time he pushed and shoved a woman at St Kilda Beach, , that unprovoked attack on a woman outside a nightclub, or the punches he threw at a group of young women at Flinders St Station, all of which , say, he was convicted of, served time, and is currently on parole for..... this sort of thing, if the case is , say, ,murder of a woman.

Just to add ... when looking at possible tendency evidence in Victoria, it has to be deemed more probative than prejudicial, according to these features:


These features are:

• The number of occasions the conduct occurred;
• The time gap between occasions;
• The degree of similarity between different occasions;
• The degree of similarity in the circumstances on different occasions;
• Whether the tendency evidence is disputed;
• The issue to which the evidence is relevant.

Tendency and Coincidence (Vic)

Tendency and coincidence evidence is evidence that an accused has a tendency to commit certain acts, based on the assertion that they have done it before, or that it is likely that an accused committed multiple acts based on the similarity of multiple allegations.

www.gotocourt.com.au

 

[Trooper]

Just to add ... when looking at possible tendency evidence in Victoria, it has to be deemed more probative than prejudicial, according to these features:


These features are:

• The number of occasions the conduct occurred;
• The time gap between occasions;
• The degree of similarity between different occasions;
• The degree of similarity in the circumstances on different occasions;
• Whether the tendency evidence is disputed;
• The issue to which the evidence is relevant.

Tendency and Coincidence (Vic)

Tendency and coincidence evidence is evidence that an accused has a tendency to commit certain acts, based on the assertion that they have done it before, or that it is likely that an accused committed multiple acts based on the similarity of multiple allegations.

www.gotocourt.com.au

I forgot the time gap one!... That has a very heavy input in the sentencing component , particularly if the incidences show that they increase and the time gaps between get shorter...

Apparently, the accused , at this time, is reported as having NO PRIOR ARRESTS.. not even a problem with alcohol or drugs... I dunno.. that sounds a bit ... off .

 

[HoneyBunOne]

The judge in Victoria , and I do think in SA, and NSW, can bring in matters during sentencing that are related to the case underway... the matters have to show a tendency, an established habit, a preference, perhaps, a certain mindset... , eg. the Judge can't bring in the parking tickets he got back in 2010, or the time he rode the #96 tram without a ticket , or got sprung shoplifting socks and underwear from Myers, etc,.

But he can bring in the time he pushed and shoved a woman at St Kilda Beach, , that unprovoked attack on a woman outside a nightclub, or the punches he threw at a group of young women at Flinders St Station, all of which , say, he was convicted of, served time, and is currently on parole for..... this sort of thing, if the case is , say, ,murder of a woman.

Yeah, that's fair enough. It has to be relevant, I get that. I was talking about Adrian Bayley (off topic, I know) and his repeated crimes of the same or similar nature (and that's the ones we know about). It tells a story of his offending, that he was not rehabilitated, that apparently he chose not to get help for himself and we now know his criminal urges escalated.

 

[BreakingNews]

I meant in sentencing once guilt has been established.

I understand it can sway a jury unfairly, but when it comes to sentencing a guilty party it has huge relevance. An indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour, especially when that behaviour repeats time and time again.

Agree. Once the jury makes a decision as to guilt, their job is done. (For our USA mates) in Oz, the jury don't have a say in the sentence. The judge listens to whatever the defence want to say like reasons why offender should get light sentence; and the prosecution will usually bring up priors and anything else to convince the judge to give the maximin sentence. Then the judge makes her/his decision, which is then open to appeal.

 

[Rocket333]

He’s been charged with murder.
If they had evidence of other offences such as rape or interfering with the body/corpse etc, would they have added them at the time the murder charge was made?
Can they add more charges later as things arise, and would the public be directly informed?

 

[Trooper]

He’s been charged with murder.
If they had evidence of other offences such as rape or interfering with the body/corpse etc, would they have added them at the time of his original arrest and charge?
Can they add more charges later as things arise, and would the public be directly informed?

This is the interesting bit, I reckon.

They can charge him with all sorts of stuff, the charge of murder well may be just the beginning. As things stand, without the body, ( and don't ask me how , I long to know, it is a puzzle to me, but I do not doubt the conclusion ) VICPOL claim that she was murdered. By Mr. Stephenson. No one else. At Mt.Clear. On Sunday morning.

Once the body is found and other investigations begin, coroner, forensics, etc .. then all manner of charges will /could flow from that.

VICPOL knows he moved the body. Because they know where he murdered her . And her body is not there at that place. Proving it, is another matter. Logic is on VICPOL's side, but it is iffy, as a court position. That particular charge, the interfering one, I expect to be laid after the summary hearing, but before any trial.


If they ever find her phone,, and it is not with her body, then there is a charge of theft. Watch, ditto.

Public information about that would be accessed once the charge is laid. VICPOL would make a statement, one that most likely would not request any questions. .

Can they add more charges later as things arise, and would the public be directly informed?

Crime is public and the police , the courts, the judges, the coroner, the DPP, the Public Prosecutor are all public office holders, paid by the taxpayer, it is not a matter of being or not being directly informed , not informing is not in the charter, it is a matter of informing, at the earliest opportunity.

 

[ScottToorak]

Has anyone worked out what the supposed incident involving SM was the night before her disappearance?. Are we sure that the particular incident did not involve PS?. I have a suspicion that SM and PS were known to one another or at least PS knew of SM and where she lived and that she was an active jogger. I recall the daughter stating at the press conference that her mother was "staying strong' or something of that nature. I have a suspicion that perhaps PS was infatuated with SM and couldn't resist the urges that his infatuation were causing. I also find it odd that not one media outlet has quoted any work collegue, friend, neighbour or family member of PS about his activities or demenour between when SM went missing and his arrest.

 

[Warshawski]

Ketamine certainly is used illegally as a recreational drug.

It's a dissociative drug.

Ketamine use in Australia - Alcohol and Drug Foundation

Recreational ketamine use in Australia: Risks, effects, and safety measures. Ketamine's legal medical applications versus illicit misuse highlighted.

adf.org.au

We have no idea if PS used this or any other illict drug in the relevant time period thou.

It's main use is for anaesthetic purposed in the medical field.

It’s also often mixed with cocaine.

And yes, mainly a ‘calmative’ drug, used as an anaesthetic or pain killer, sometimes for depression, but some people experience severe hallucinations, anxiety & memory loss. … even death.

Like all drugs, it can be extremely dangerous in the wrong hands.

Ketamine use in Australia - Alcohol and Drug Foundation

Recreational ketamine use in Australia: Risks, effects, and safety measures. Ketamine's legal medical applications versus illicit misuse highlighted.

adf.org.au

https://www.dea.gov/factsheets/ketamine

 

[Rocket333]

Has anyone worked out what the supposed incident involving SM was the night before her disappearance?. Are we sure that the particular incident did not involve PS?. I have a suspicion that SM and PS were known to one another or at least PS knew of SM and where she lived and that she was an active jogger. I recall the daughter stating at the press conference that her mother was "staying strong' or something of that nature. I have a suspicion that perhaps PS was infatuated with SM and couldn't resist the urges that his infatuation were causing. I also find it odd that not one media outlet has quoted any work collegue, friend, neighbour or family member of PS about his activities or demenour between when SM went missing and his arrest.

Didn’t SM simply have a dinner party at home with family and friends, during which she mentioned going for a 14k run the next day?

If it was targeted, and SM was the intended victim, the window of opportunity and cleanup/ removal time was tight. She was expected home within a relatively short amount of time. If PS knew that and still went for it, he was brazen. Makes me think it was more opportunistic, but thought out in advance.

Re the friends and colleagues not speaking, I doubt that’s not due to the media not trying. It feels like his family at least have gone to ground.
Just noting for what it’s worth, there was a comment earlier that PS’s mother resembled SM. The gf’s mother does too.

 

[Officer Dibble]

I guess OP meant Ms Sissy.

JMO

I've clearly not been keeping up. I'd love a link if anyone kindly has one. Thank you