Found Deceased Australia - Karen Ristevski, 47, Melbourne, Vic, 29 June 2016 - #16 *Arrest*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
sosocurious said:
“If you can’t cover your rent, wages and stock you’re not going to be surviving and this business wasn’t covering that.”

Mr Curtin said a company called Warrant Brands, of which the Ristevskis were directors, had traded as the fashion store Bella Bleu.

But as of July 1, 2016 a new company called Envirovision, directed by Ristevski with daughter Sarah as shareholder, had evolved.

“All the revenue from Bella Bleu was going into this company,” Mr Curtin said. “As at June 30, Warrant Brands no longer has any income.

“I’ve got absolutely no idea why that would’ve occurred. It has no real impact on the liabilities of Warrant Brands.”

Nocookies
Borce Ristevski committal hearing: Karen Ristevski’s dress shop in ‘constant financial struggle’
Click to expand...

BBM .... except, Borce was sole director as of March 2016.

And Karen was deceased as of 29th June 2016.

All just in time for Envirovision to absorb Warrant Brands total income at the start of a new financial year. With no-one left alive to blow the whistle on the shonky money-dealings.


Paperwork declaring Mr Ristevski had taken over from his wife as the sole director of Warrant Brands, which is linked to her Bella Bleu fashion label, was filed with the Australian Securities & Investments Commission in March.
The Australian, 12:00AM August 20, 2016
 
kiwilaura said:
I’m very interested in this case and have followed it since the beginning. But it’s so frustrating to see how adamant people are that Sarah was involved in killing her mother.

Grounds seem to be:
- she went overseas (she’s 21, life actually does continue. I lost my dad at 20 and I still travelled and had fun, I also had days of despair-filled crippling grief)
- she seems to be protecting her dad (is it really that hard to accept that she just loves him so much that she’s willing to believe all his lies 100%??)
- she focuses on herself during cross examination, seems self centred (really? She lost her mum, oh and she’s a millennial lol)
- she asked for clarification for a simple question (when I wasn a witness in a trial, I was told if I had even a shred of doubt about a question I needed to seek clarification)
- she didn’t look at her dad when on the stand (again, you’re advised to do this when giving evidence).

I’m honestly flabbergasted that so many people are out to string her up. Isn’t this a victim friendly forum? She’s a victim too.

Borce is on trial, he highly likely killed his wife, for all the reasons we have suspected all along. Sarah is not on trial, so everyone should just move past that. Stop hating on her just because she doesn’t fit your predefined image of a grieving daughter.
Click to expand...

If you think any posts are against WS TOS you should report them.

Instead of taking your frustration out on other members telling others what they should think or what they should do, which I may add is also against WS TOS.
 
kiwilaura said:
RSBM. Actjally, as the defence, they deal with ensuring that the law is applied correctly. They are going to argue that the evidence the prosecution is presenting does not meet the legal standard required for a murder charge. I would say they will argue that the charge was incorrectly brought to court and should have been manslaughter in the first place.

If you think the defence has no legal obligation to ensure the charges laid are the appropriate ones, then you are mistaken.
Click to expand...

Is this your opinion? Or is there a link to provide substantiation to what you are saying?
I can see the defence trying to wiggle in any way that they can (as Trooper has indicated), but I do not believe that I have personally seen a case before where the defence try to get the charge reduced without admitting some client culpability.
 
Trooper said:
I hardly think the word ' fail ' in this context passes across the mind of the Barristers appointed to represent Borce. They get paid, at agreed rates 'win, lose or draw' regardless of which charge he goes to trial on. Borce's fate is not something that Barristers can afford to lose sleep over. There are so many clients, so little time.

I happen to think that the foundation the defence barristers are presenting.. in other words, 'alleging' , the one where it cant be definitively stated as to the cause of Karen's death is flimsy at best, and disingenuous at worst.

But it's worth a try, and it's par for the course for the defence to try and float it.

I just don't think it will be granted. There is very little precedence for it, in this context. There is some, but not enough, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think the submission will be declined. But they would be foolish not to try.
 
Could Borce have seriously believed that the Envirovision stuff would remain hidden? And by extension, could Sarah have believed that also? I can give her a free kick in so far as perhaps Borce didn't tell her she was a stakeholder, but he would have had to disclose that to her once Karen didn't return and certainly, absolutely once Karens' body was found.


I am so curious as to why both thought it was (a) a good idea to do it and (b) a good idea to fail to mention it to police.
 
Mr Curtain told the court that for some reason, the revenue from Warrant Brands started to transfer to Envirovision in 2016.

"As of June 30 [2016], Warrant Brands no longer has any income because that's given to Envirovision. It's not able to meet any of its loans and any liabilities," he said.

"It basically took on the sales revenue from the shop at Water Gardens."

When he was asked why this would have happened, Mr Curtain said he had no idea.

"The debts of Warrant Brands, if it was an attempt to avoid that debt, I don't know."

"It doesn't have any impact, they still have those liabilities."

The court also heard the couple refinanced their home twice in May 2013 and in 2014.

Assets moved to company in Borce Ristevski's name before wife disappeared, court told
 
SouthAussie said:
Is this your opinion? Or is there a link to provide substantiation to what you are saying?
I can see the defence trying to wiggle in any way that they can (as Trooper has indicated), but I do not believe that I have personally seen a case before where the defence try to get the charge reduced without admitting some client culpability.
Click to expand...

I’m not going to trawl for an Australia legislation link to prove that part of the job of a defence lawyer is to ensure correct legal procedure is followed. That is generally accepted and also known to be the basis of post-conviction appeal.

If you’re asking for a proof that the reason that Borce’s lawyers are asking for the downgrade is due to not meeting the evidence threshold for a murder charge, it’s in pretty much every article on the fact, but here’s one:

Borce Ristevski's lawyers argue he should be tried for manslaughter | Daily Mail Online
 
Trooper said:
Could Borce have seriously believed that the Envirovision stuff would remain hidden? And by extension, could Sarah have believed that also? I can give her a free kick in so far as perhaps Borce didn't tell her she was a stakeholder, but he would have had to disclose that to her once Karen didn't return and certainly, absolutely once Karens' body was found.


I am so curious as to why both thought it was (a) a good idea to do it and (b) a good idea to fail to mention it to police.
Click to expand...

I am interested in what capacity Sarah was a stakeholder. Was "Sarah's" (ie: Karen's) inheritance wrapped up in the business dealings?


STAKEHOLDER
A person, group or organization that has interest or concern in an organization.
Stakeholders can affect or be affected by the organization's actions, objectives and policies. Some examples of key stakeholders are creditors, directors, employees, government (and its agencies), owners (shareholders), suppliers, unions, and the community from which the business draws its resources.
What comes after those ellipses?

What is a Stakeholder? A stakeholder is anybody who can affect or is affected by an organisation, strategy or project. They can be internal or external and they can be at senior or junior levels.
Stakeholder | Definition - What is a stakeholder?
 
kiwilaura said:
I’m not going to trawl for an Australia legislation link to prove that part of the job of a defence lawyer is to ensure correct legal procedure is followed. That is generally accepted and also known to be the basis of post-conviction appeal.

If you’re asking for a proof that the reason that Borce’s lawyers are asking for the downgrade is due to not meeting the evidence threshold for a murder charge, it’s in pretty much every article on the fact, but here’s one:

Borce Ristevski's lawyers argue he should be tried for manslaughter | Daily Mail Online
Click to expand...

No, I am not asking for MSM reports of Borce's lawyer's intentions. Those I have read. I am asking for an example of a trial (not an appeal) where the defence have requested a downgrade of the charges without admitting some client culpability. I am not seeing this action as a generally accepted procedure.

To me, a person is charged, the defence defend against that charge. Right or wrong charge. It is the prosecution's job to decide the charge. If the charge is incorrect, it should make the defence job easier. imo

All I have seen in the past is a person(s) plead guilty to a lesser charge. I have not seen a charge debated in court, without client culpability being admitted.
 
What the Police must prove according to VIC Law for Murder
(a) The accused caused the death of another person by an intended act or omission.

(b) There was malice aforethought that preceded or co-existed with this act or omission.

(c) Malice aforethought is satisfied in a number of ways.

Firstly, it may be satisfied by an intention to cause the death of, or grievous bodily harm to, any person whether such person is killed or not.

Secondly, it may be satisfied by knowledge that the act which caused death would probably cause the death of, or grievous bodily harm to, some person, whether such person is actually killed or not.

Thirdly, it may be satisfied by an intent to commit any crime the necessary elements of which include violence and which may on first conviction be punished by life imprisonment or imprisonment for a term of 120 months or more, where the death is intentionally caused by an act of violence done in the course or furtherance of such a crime.

Murder - Australian Criminal Lawyers Melbourne
 
I don't know any Uber drivers, at least, well enough to ask them how much they earn a day, on average.. anyone have any insight into this?

I ask, because I am curious how Borce managed to avoid working for wages, or even running a profitable business himself.. His daily routine seems a bit aimless, the Uber driving being a recent activity.

The debt in the family is rising exponentially, compounded by the debt in BellaBlue running concurrently. I doubt if Uber driving bought in enough to feed the 3 of them, much less pay the bills associated with the running of a large house, electricity, phones, gas, rates, water, repairs, trips overseas, and so on.

And paying out for Sarah, schooling, transport, meals out, clothing , play money etc.

Yet Borce just ambled about while this hideous debt was increasing daily.. how did he do that?
 
Trooper said:
I don't know any Uber drivers, at least, well enough to ask them how much they earn a day, on average.. anyone have any insight into this?

I ask, because I am curious how Borce managed to avoid working for wages, or even running a profitable business himself.. His daily routine seems a bit aimless, the Uber driving being a recent activity.

The debt in the family is rising exponentially, compounded by the debt in BellaBlue running concurrently. I doubt if Uber driving bought in enough to feed the 3 of them, much less pay the bills associated with the running of a large house, electricity, phones, gas, rates, water, repairs, trips overseas, and so on.

And paying out for Sarah, schooling, transport, meals out, clothing , play money etc.

Yet Borce just ambled about while this hideous debt was increasing daily.. how did he do that?
Click to expand...

There are a few you tube videos about it Trooper, they don't make a lot for the number of hours put in. Most just do it to supplement their income.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 63 more.
Total: 3,499 (members: 64, guests: 3,435)

Online statistics

Members online
64
Guests online
3,435
Total visitors
3,499
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,399
Messages
17,968,388
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top