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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
sbr said:
They could be using that additional charge (if true) which would be at the very least sex with a minor to keep him in custody etc whilst they work on the murder charges. By the sounds of it, if they did find his semen then that additional charge is given. I am assuming there is more to their evidence then just that though, as I said in a previous post this would be very bad for him, he's lost friends, no doubt his job. Who knows what this is doing to his family in the town also. I wouldn't want to be them right now. I would like to think the police wouldn't be so ignorant as to ruin another person/family without good cause.

Don't forget the lady earlier whom said he had cuts on his arm, if this lady is telling the truth then he must be involved.
Click to expand...

I don't recall anyone saying that, one lady said her son saw cuts on his hands, but that many mechanics have cuts so they didn't think anymore of it.
 
midsommer said:
I thought the "gasping" was in relation to the state of the bodies.
I am sure someone who said they were at the trial posted that on the closed threads.
Click to expand...

Apparently the "gasping" was from the suppressed charge.

I'd be inclined to gasp ...after all, what had happened to them was bad enough.
 
Aussiecriminals said:
Hi, yeah 110% true, once the dna and other vital evidence is secured it is all over red rover, the only think left to argue is a defence if any ie motivation, pre meditation etc state of mind. All for the sentencing phase.There is NO question whatsoever about who did this.Only why:furious:
Click to expand...

I know it is isn't it, I would not be surprised if he ends up admitting guilt for this one, it would be the best bet for a chance of him ever seeing daylight again, but I don't think that is going to happen regardless.

As far as sentencing goes...I can't think of any defense which will work for him considering the number of victims. If he tries to say he was provoked by CR that doesn't explain the other two murders, and if he says he was fighting off her dad and had to defend himself that doesn't explain the murder of CR. Thank god for DNA and forensics I say....and there will be more than one type of DNA left at a crime scene like this too, there is a fair chance there will be blood and semen, which will be impossible to explain away.
 
midsommer said:
The person who posted about her son-in-law being asked by police to drive him to the police station made me wonder about many things.

Would/did the police really ask that?

If they planned to arrest him, wouldn't they go to his work?

If the trip to the police station happened as she said, then I do not think the police were waiting to charge him at that point.

Something must have been said after he arrived at the police station to sign his statement that made the police arrest him.

The point made by sbr is good - If he kept his arms covered at work, who saw these cuts and how?
Click to expand...

My thinking is, it could be possible that they were trying to avoid bringing attention of where this workplace is to the media. They did allegedly speak to the employer/owner first before deciding to take the path they did. Perhaps the owner was concerned about his business being tarnished by this crime.

My other questions that have just come up, is that she mentioned how the reason he didn't have his car, was that the police had taken it as well as his shoes etc prior and he was keeping it to himself. I am wondering how they know that now?

She did mention that the police whisked the suspect away and then they took the son in law somewhere and talked to him also. Perhaps, it was after talking to him and the suspect, that they then decided to arrest the suspect.

I still find it strange that after knowing they had taken his car, shoes etc that he still calmly went to the police station, could he possibly be that naive or overly confident? had he blocked the memory out? or perhaps he just didn't know what else to do?

It's weird, some actions would make one think he is guilty and trying to hide it where as other actions would make one think he was not guilty and unaware. If he is guilty, he can't be totally oblivious or why would he feel the need to hide his arms and keep the reason why he didn't have his car a secret (if true)? You would think if he was totally innocent he would be angry that they suspect him of doing such a thing to his best friend and taking his car?
 
singers said:
I don't recall anyone saying that, one lady said her son saw cuts on his hands, but that many mechanics have cuts so they didn't think anymore of it.
Click to expand...

She very well did allege that he had cuts on his arms and was teased by his work mates all week for wearing jumpers in hot weather.
 
Originally Posted by mum73
He is an adult, but the suppression order was requested due to the fact he has offered an alibi (at this stage it hasn't been released as to what/who though). The lawyer also added "It's also put that identification procedures may result." I would love to hear want anyone thinks they mean by this...

Apparently they will meet again on Wednesday, when it will be decided whether further information relating to the accused/alibi/additional charge/crime can be released.
Click to expand...
Police must have the opportunity to check that claim with witnesses before their accounts are influenced by media coverage of the case.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...reach-of-secrecy/story-e6freabc-1225955208196

I believe this is what is meant by identification procedures. They want to investigate his alibi and identifying him and his picture through the media may cloud or influence answers witnesses may answer. Power of suggestion and all that.

IMO
 
You know if he is guilty, he might not be as dumb as people seem to think. He may realise that he is pretty much screwed by the way he did it (in an uncontrollable rage) and thus left too much evidence behind, so he is trying to act in a way to help his plea such as mental illness, drug induced etc

It's such a shame, as his life was just starting out and by the looks of it he was on a good track and now it's all just gone to waste for no real good reason. The police better be right.
 
sbr said:
My thinking is, it could be possible that they were trying to avoid bringing attention of where this workplace is to the media. They did allegedly speak to the employer/owner first before deciding to take the path they did. Perhaps the owner was concerned about his business being tarnished by this crime.
Click to expand...

ITA

My other questions that have just come up is that she mentioned how the reason he didn't have his car was that the police had taken it as well as his shoes etc prior and he was keeping it to himself. I am wondering how they know that now?
Click to expand...

Maybe the police told SIL during his interview after the arrest...would like to know that myself, someone must have let this info slip, maybe even his own brother perhaps?

She did mention that the police whisked the suspect away and then they took the son in law somewhere and talked to him also. Perhaps it was after talking to him and the suspect that they then decided to arrest the suspect.
Click to expand...

I think they decided to arrest the suspect the instant those initial DNA results came in and they got a match, but that they probably wanted to talk to SIL to see if he had anything to tell them now that he knew the accused was under arrest, eg other observations, weird comments etc.

I still find it strange that after knowing they had taken his car, shoes etc that he still calmly went to the police station, could he possibly be that naive or overly confident? had he blocked the memory out? or perhaps he just didn't know what else to do?
Click to expand...

I think he was continuing the 'helpful friend' ruse, and really what else could he do, if he didn't play along and look like he was being helpful then suddenly everything heats up and he was hoping to avoid that.

It's weird, some actions would make one think he is guilty and trying to hide it where as other actions would make one think he was not guilty and unaware. If he is guilty, he can't be totally oblivious or why would he feel the need to hide his arms and keep the reason why he didn't have his car a secret (if true)? You would think if he was totally innocent he would be angry that they suspect him of doing such a thing to his best friend and taking his car?
Click to expand...

And yet he hides his face, says nothing....I am surprised that he seemed to calmly get on with the fake grieving process and not to set off any alarms in anyone else actually, but considering everyone around him was wrapped up in their own grief, shock, horror then I guess that could explain it. Unusual behavior, but I have a feeling he thought his actions were justified in his own warped world view, so what's to feel bad about from his point of view?
Click to expand...
 
sbr said:
She very well did allege that he had cuts on his arms and was teased by his work mates all week for wearing jumpers in hot weather.
Click to expand...
He wore long sleeves all week, which they ribbed him about. I don't think they saw his arms tho.

He had been interviewed by the police already, I'm sure they saw the cuts on his hands and surely would have asked to see his arms. I'd love to know the reason he gave.
I have to imagine they probably suspected him from the start and either let him think he got away with it to see if he would slip up in some way, or they were waiting for the DNA results to come back. I wonder if they led him to believe he wasn't a suspect?
 
hi all
wat happens after wednesday,does it mean people can say his name? and what information will we hear,if any ?.not to clued up on this type of thing,
fee,,
 
nobody11 said:
I am so totally with you there! your first post was very well done by the way! Imo I think if someone has common sense they would know there is not enough info released to without a doubt say "yes" it was the accused. I am a local and it is well know around town they were still engaged in some kind of relationship, so sorry but a semen DNA does not convince me. [snip] he was not a loner and was liked by many people. Nor did he have any signs leading up to this to say he was capable of this. Honestly I can not see someone doing their first murder in the way this one had been done. Really the spelling is no biggy with kids, it has been some time since I have met a kid who can actually spell, between underpaid teachers, over crowded class rooms and the kids abbreviating for texting, the art of spelling has flown out the window .....
Click to expand...

Great to have a local here. So he had a good social group of friends and most knew he was in a relationship with the victim. Do you know if the victims boyfriend knew they were still in a relationship? Also any info on the accused family life? Mother and step father? Was it a normal happy home?
 
ozziefee said:
hi all
wat happens after wednesday,does it mean people can say his name? and what information will we hear,if any ?.not to clued up on this type of thing,
fee,,
Click to expand...

That depends on what happens in court....the suppression order may stay in place until Feb, but I really hope not, it's not going to be easy referring to him as 'the accused' or 'he who has been remanded in custody after a solid DNA match' for that long!
 
In regards to the suppressed charge, (IMO I believe it most likely but,) is there evidence this charge relates to CR?
 
It has happened many times in the past, seemigly nice gentle mannered people have killed a friend, a best friend, a family member, relative, or workmate. People/friends/family of victims just dont think it could happen to them and think its like the movies and the murderer has to be some random, evil, mean person not known to or close to the victim. There is nothing strange to me about the fact that the accussed was well known to the family and very good friends with CR and still could have done it. I have no doubt in my mind that many of the grieving friends would have never even considered 'the accused' could have been the murderer or that the murderer could have been grieving with them at the shrine etc
 
MissedCalling said:
In regards to the suppressed charge, (IMO I believe it most likely but,) is there evidence this charge relates to CR?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting it could relate to the mother? if so yes i guess thats a posibility. Keep in mind the Police have said that 'It appears that CR was the target'
 
That depends on what happens in court....the suppression order may stay in place until Feb, but I really hope not, it's not going to be easy referring to him as 'the accused' or 'he who has been remanded in custody after a solid DNA match' for that long!
Click to expand...

Yeah i fully agree. Hopefully they have checked out his 'alibi' by then and can release his name.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 161 more.
Total: 1,484 (members: 162, guests: 1,322)

Online statistics

Members online
162
Guests online
1,322
Total visitors
1,484
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
596,503
Messages
18,048,823
Members
230,017
Latest member
kcb46761
Back
Top