Found Deceased Australia - Elisa Curry, 43, Aireys Inlet, Melbourne, 30 Sept 2017 #2

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
iailwa said:
what i find interesting in 1 or two of Elisa's letter is this - bold, italic, & underline by me

'Such vocabulary carries with it great stigma, making addicts feel like they are failures, and creating the perception among families and friends that their loved one is simply not trying hard enough.
'This creates further mental trauma for users. What we need is more understanding and acceptance of drug users: for a father to hug his son, tell him he is 100 per cent worthy and that he will support him whether or not he continues to use drugs.'


Also, she mentions in another post that it's difficult for women staying at home, when the husband has a 'mental illness'. sorry i can't find the link right now. but i know it exists. it's kinda weird



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rote-papers-drugs-poofters.html#ixzz4uo7UAH3g
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Click to expand...

I would be unsurprised if someone very close to her struggles with addiction. I know she herself does with alcohol, but it seems she has more of a focus on drug addiction in her writing.
 
mdcmdc said:
I could see Elisa writing that way so as to have plausible deniability if her views offended someone in her real life - "oh no, that's not what I meant" etc.

Re. the homes, they have owned the Surrey Hills one since 2010($1.85 million), the holiday home since 2015($910,000).

On the pictures from the holiday home listing with Domain which are still online, there is a Listed: Feb 2017 watermark when you click into the pictures. This watermark isn't on the listing with Real Estate . com though, so might just be an error.
I think the Listed: Feb 2017 watermark made some think the holiday house might have been briefly put up for sale this year then taken off market.
Click to expand...

So to help with this question about the "Feb 2017" on the Domain page.
https://www.domain.com.au/property-profile/16-aireys-street-aireys-inlet-vic-3231

I searched on a holiday house that I actually know is on the market and on Domain it has a small orange "For Sale" indicator, which does not appear on the Aireys Inlet property. This property has also been on the market, with no changes to the details since July 2015 but it clearly says "Listed August 2017", which suggests there has been some sort of refresh - either on the site or by the real estate agent.

It may be that the Aireys Inlet was listed briefly, but it may also be that "Listed" means "refreshed?" Either way, I definitely don't think it's currently for sale and it may not have been listed at all in Feb.

Hope that's helpful!
 
SherlockSleuth said:
Just on the grand final tickets, there's a decent chance DC obtained them through work, and therefore didn't pay for them. I'm only putting this out there because earlier, some thought it odd (I think) that he was away from her for such an event.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's odd. I like my solitude if i can get it -- hubby and the children away. As much as i love being a mother (like hopelessly!) i do enjoy a break. In fact hubby & kids are seeing harry potter tonight - we sometimes take it in turns, but more often we go to an event together as a family... but if i'm pissed off with hubby, like I 'may' have been when he was booking the tickets months ago (I can't remember even), then i'll opt out sometimes just for some hopeful time to myself, like tonight! :D
 
Constableno1 said:
I find the timing too close of a coincidence for when the neighbour went over for a second time (10pm) and when her phone went off (10.30pm) and then she disappears. Elisa must have been in an extreme state of mind then at around 10pm to have turned off her phone by 10.30pm, but this isn't really what we have heard from the neighbour, although we may not have been told. I'm saying this on the assumption that she wouldn't normally turn her phone off but who knows maybe she does.

If Elisa was going to top herself near the house or down at the beach, why take her phone with her. Did she take it with her and then turn it off near the beach? That would mean she would have left fairly quickly after the neighbour left, but according to the neighbour she was getting ready for bed. This doesn't make sense to me. I guess we just don't have enough information.
I'd like to know:
* were her keys at the house or are they missing? Presumably they are at the house as the cops said only her phone was missing.
* was the dog leash at home? If it was at the house then presumably if she took the dog out for a walk at that hour she would have had the dog on a leash.
* did she typically lock the house if she was going out for a walk? Was the house left open when the husband returned on Sunday morning?
* where were Eliza's pj's located when David arrived? Were they in a spot where she would drop them on the floor before putting on her running gear or were they under her pillow? What are her typical habits with putting them away etc?
* do we know if the neighbour changed her story to the police saying she went back on her own or was that her original story but the cops didn't release that part until later? If she changed her story that does seem like a red flag.

So many unanswered questions.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about the phone being switched off at 10:30. The last activity was at 10:30, so it was known to be on then, but if there was no activity until the next morning, can it be established what time it was switched off (or destroyed)?

Would the dog necessarily have used a leash in a country area like Aireys?

Strange about the neighbour . . . well, we know some information's been omitted. I wonder if Elisa told her she was afraid and wanted company through the night. She seemed to have managed not to be alone for most of the day.
 
thegreatoutdoors said:
Nope, Ted Bundy looks like a psychopath. He has the eyes of a very intense person. He makes me feel quite ill.
Click to expand...

It's common knowledge that many thought him kind, polite and good looking BEFORE he was arrested. Afterwards well yes of course people are going to have a different opinion of him.
 
JLZ said:
I'm not sure about the phone being switched off at 10:30. The last activity was at 10:30, so it was known to be on then, but if there was no activity until the next morning, can it be established what time it was switched off (or destroyed)?

Would the dog necessarily have used a leash in a country area like Aireys?

Strange about the neighbour . . . well, we know some information's been omitted. I wonder if Elisa told her she was afraid and wanted company through the night. She seemed to have managed not to be alone for most of the day.
Click to expand...

I thought in an article it said the phone was switched off at 10.30 but maybe that is wrong.

Yes it could be that she never used a leash. Another question that we don't know.

Hopefully we find out more information. Such a mystery! I thought that if she killed herself she would have been found by now....
 
Constableno1 said:
I find the timing too close of a coincidence for when the neighbour went over for a second time (10pm) and when her phone went off (10.30pm) and then she disappears. Elisa must have been in an extreme state of mind then at around 10pm to have turned off her phone by 10.30pm, but this isn't really what we have heard from the neighbour, although we may not have been told. I'm saying this on the assumption that she wouldn't normally turn her phone off but who knows maybe she does.

If Elisa was going to top herself near the house or down at the beach, why take her phone with her. Did she take it with her and then turn it off near the beach? That would mean she would have left fairly quickly after the neighbour left, but according to the neighbour she was getting ready for bed. This doesn't make sense to me. I guess we just don't have enough information.
I'd like to know:
* were her keys at the house or are they missing? Presumably they are at the house as the cops said only her phone was missing.
* was the dog leash at home? If it was at the house then presumably if she took the dog out for a walk at that hour she would have had the dog on a leash.
* did she typically lock the house if she was going out for a walk? Was the house left open when the husband returned on Sunday morning?
* where were Eliza's pj's located when David arrived? Were they in a spot where she would drop them on the floor before putting on her running gear or were they under her pillow? What are her typical habits with putting them away etc?
* do we know if the neighbour changed her story to the police saying she went back on her own or was that her original story but the cops didn't release that part until later? If she changed her story that does seem like a red flag.

So many unanswered questions.
Click to expand...

I don't know why i think this way -- but the neighbour visiting at 10pm, and the phone off at 10.30 makes me suspicious. How long was the chat they had?

Could her mobile have gone flat, cause she didn't bother & was a little tipsy (i'll charge it in the morn type of thing?), and then possibly some foul play through the night -- at any time? With the perp taking her phone?

Or, was this a case of recreation drugs (supplied) plus prescription drug overdose, by a supplier living near? Like a friend? It's not unheard of

Or was a hitman arranged & it's just totally convenient she turned off her phone? Or would a hitman come so early within the neighbours visit - i doubt it. But if the hubby didn't know she had a late visitor then it is possible

i know suicide is not out of the question... but neither is anything else. Weird she has inheritance problems, with just one sibling. Weird the surrey hills home might be for sale (indicating seperation?)...

We are a one income family in our household, and our inheritance troubles only relate to siblings. But then again, if she her got inheritance...then what?? would it mean the hubby get's that too, as well as the life insurance & the homes?

would a sibling be involved if there was angst?

so many questions!
 
Constableno1 said:
I thought in an article it said the phone was switched off at 10.30 but maybe that is wrong.

Yes it could be that she never used a leash. Another question that we don't know.

Hopefully we find out more information. Such a mystery! I thought that if she killed herself she would have been found by now....
Click to expand...

The phone last pinged the Airey's Inlet tower at 10.30 pm. I think they are assuming because there were no more pings the phone was switched off, as while on phones keep pinging towers. That said, they never give us the full story on phones. We only got the story on JM's phone after they go AB. Everybody was asking, 'what about her phone!', cops were all over it and were not keeping us in the loop!
 
thegreatoutdoors said:
Nope, Ted Bundy looks like a psychopath. He has the eyes of a very intense person. He makes me feel quite ill.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%! I have never understood why people always use him as an example when people say, "But he looked so nice/normal" (in reference to a criminal), then someone else replies with, "Well everyone thought that about Ted Bundy, and look what he did." Ugh, Bundy looks crazy as all get out and if someone with those crazy eyes approached me I would have gotten away from him as soon as possible.
 
News reports that she didn't wear her Fitbit tracker in the Days leading up to her disappearance. Was she checking out an area where she would like to ultimately disappear before she did on the Saturday of grand final? Knowing that there would be less cars and pedestrians around? Anyone could access her Fitbit account online and see where she'd been in the days leading up to her disappearance if she had worn the fit bit
 
thegreatoutdoors said:
The phone last pinged the Airey's Inlet tower at 10.30 pm. I think they are assuming because there were no more pings the phone was switched off, as while on phones keep pinging towers. That said, they never give us the full story on phones. We only got the story on JM's phone after they go AB. Everybody was asking, 'what about her phone!', cops were all over it and were not keeping us in the loop!
Click to expand...

I think I've read that pings only happen when the location changes (phone connects to a different tower) or a call or message occurs. I wonder how far the phone could travel without the tower changing. Would a switched on phone ping if she only went a couple of hundred metres to the beach?
 
iailwa said:
I don't know why i think this way -- but the neighbour visiting at 10pm, and the phone off at 10.30 makes me suspicious. How long was the chat they had?

Could her mobile have gone flat, cause she didn't bother & was a little tipsy (i'll charge it in the morn type of thing?), and then possibly some foul play through the night -- at any time? With the perp taking her phone?

Or, was this a case of recreation drugs (supplied) plus prescription drug overdose, by a supplier living near? Like a friend? It's not unheard of

Or was a hitman arranged & it's just totally convenient she turned off her phone? Or would a hitman come so early within the neighbours visit - i doubt it. But if the hubby didn't know she had a late visitor then it is possible

i know suicide is not out of the question... but neither is anything else. Weird she has inheritance problems, with just one sibling. Weird the surrey hills home might be for sale (indicating seperation?)...

We are a one income family in our household, and our inheritance troubles only relate to siblings. But then again, if she her got inheritance...then what?? would it mean the hubby get's that too, as well as the life insurance & the homes?

would a sibling be involved if there was angst?

so many questions!
Click to expand...


I've gone down the hitman route, it's a difficult theory because:

1. No sign of break, did she let them in?
2. Dog would have barked his head off, neighbours would have heard something?
3. Hitman/men would have to come via car, someone must have seen headlights, heard it in such a quiet area?
4. How did the hitman know it was safe to go in with neighbour coming and going like that?
5. If she felt so unsafe, why did she stay? She had her car, she could have left, or stayed with the neighbour?
6. How would the hitman be paid off? Wouldn't that be traceable in some way?
7. If so well planned, why not make it look like she did a runner. Take her purse, clothes etc?
8. DC would need a secret phone to contact hitman/men on - it's at this point I stop and think, is my hitman theory really plausible!
 
Constableno1 said:
I thought in an article it said the phone was switched off at 10.30 but maybe that is wrong.

Yes it could be that she never used a leash. Another question that we don't know.

Hopefully we find out more information. Such a mystery! I thought that if she killed herself she would have been found by now....
Click to expand...

Does anyone turn off their phone at night?

I never do in case of an emergency.
If I was away from my husband and children & knowing they were out and then travelling. I wouldn't turn it off. I just wouldn't. Just in case.
Just wondering.
 
LuluCherry said:
I agree 100%! I have never understood why people always use him as an example when people say, "But he looked so nice/normal" (in reference to a criminal), then someone else replies with, "Well everyone thought that about Ted Bundy, and look what he did." Ugh, Bundy looks crazy as all get out and if someone with those crazy eyes approached me I would have gotten away from him as soon as possible.
Click to expand...

He quite literally looks like a mad man. An attractive mad man, but a mad man none the less.
 
- The video was made by the media department.
- The media dept made a mistake by including an internal police circular.
- As soon as they became aware, the video was deleted.
- Unfortunately, it was seen by some people and media outlets.
- He agrees it was not appropriate, the media dept have apologised to him, he has apologised to the family, they have accepted his apology.


Reply to me from Insp Peter Seel today. He seems a good person to take on the responsibility of dealing with this personally. We have agreed that the matter is now closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 196 more.
Total: 3,740 (members: 197, guests: 3,543)

Online statistics

Members online
197
Guests online
3,543
Total visitors
3,740
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,008
Messages
17,979,691
Members
228,985
Latest member
LLawliet0
Back
Top