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 #4

Status
Not open for further replies.

StillDiggin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
3,086
Reaction score
12,341
desperate search continues for a mother-of-three who vanished without a trace after heading off on a 20km run during a heatwave.

Samantha Murphy, 51, was last seen leaving her home on Eureka Street in Ballarat East, about 100km northwest of Melbourne, at 7am on Sunday.

It's understood she was planning to run through the Canadian State Forest and was captured on CCTV wearing a brown singlet and black half-length leggings.

The mother-of-three has now been missing for almost 36 hours

Her 'upset and concerned' family hold grave concerns and described her disappearance as out of character.
1707124823535.jpeg

Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Today, Andrew Rule has published a longish article (paywalled for some).

He goes over a number of missing person cases, basically saying that while a miracle for Sam could happen, it wouldn't make a good bet.

There are very few people like CS who are miraculously discovered alive.

But it is agony for the family if she isn't found. He relates how a man's sister and brother in law disappeared 30 years ago and he couldn't accept that he wouldn't see them again until his sister didn't show up (25 years later) for their mum's funeral.

And he speaks of the young ones like Natasha Ryan (14) who disappeared, and a couple of different people were - at different times - thought to have murdered her. Then police found her 5 years later secretly living with her older boyfriend. She never revealed herself despite all the publicity and accusations.

 
Last edited:
I'm now feeling that it's either a random opportunistic attack, or someone she knew, but not a family member..
I’m tending to think that lack of any evidence, leans less towards a random attack ….. it shouldn’t be as “tidy” as it appears to be, to date …
There should be evidence accidentally left behind ..

Someone she knew … yes close to home … a link somewhere

Family member … Maybe not immediate family, but possibly extended family member who had a grudge or similar?

Possibly planned … Sam had a routine ..

IMO
 


He said phone data had tracked Ms Murphy at least 7 kilometres from home on Sunday morning an hour after she had left for her run.
So an hour after she left home at 7.00 am - so maybe data at 8.00 am. IMO

He said "intelligence derived from phone data" meant police would renew focus on an area near Mount Clear, a suburb south of Ballarat CBD, as part of their investigation.

Maybe the Apple Watch as others here have pointed out in earlier threads displayed a movement change at this time and that was close to Mount Clear. IMO

They say they believe "more parties are involved in her disappearance"

Maybe other pings from phones belonging to more than one person.JMO

It just seems unusual to hint at "more parties" MOO

So then if someone was planning to do this - then they forgot to turn off their phones? IMO

Could 2 people have been going to pick SM up - innocent intention - but this was not what SM wanted to do and then something happened. Might explain if there was more than one data pickup at the same time in the same area. But possibly these people are known to SM in some capacity??? MOO
 
I'm now feeling that it's either a random opportunistic attack, or someone she knew, but not a family member..
The first missing case I ever followed was near my home, 1987, a young woman jogging early one morning. Her disappearance was shocking, it was a very low crime area (still is). They somehow convicted the guy, he accidentally encountered her while driving his truck, but her remains have never been found.

So maybe I always have that case in mind when I follow missing jogger cases.

JMO
 


He said phone data had tracked Ms Murphy at least 7 kilometres from home on Sunday morning an hour after she had left for her run.
So an hour after she left home at 7.00 am - so maybe data at 8.00 am. IMO

He said "intelligence derived from phone data" meant police would renew focus on an area near Mount Clear, a suburb south of Ballarat CBD, as part of their investigation.

Maybe the Apple Watch as others here have pointed out in earlier threads displayed a movement change at this time and that was close to Mount Clear. IMO

They say they believe "more parties are involved in her disappearance"

Maybe other pings from phones belonging to more than one person.JMO

It just seems unusual to hint at "more parties" MOO

So then if someone was planning to do this - then they forgot to turn off their phones? IMO

Could 2 people have been going to pick SM up - innocent intention - but this was not what SM wanted to do and then something happened. Might explain if there was more than one data pickup at the same time in the same area. But possibly these people are known to SM in some capacity??? MOO
I believe even if you turn off your phone it can still be traced? It may be inactive but then once it turns back on a telco provider will have a record of where and when. So, if someone was with Samantha and turned off her phone & watch then turned their own phone back on once they thought they were out of danger or risk in the vicinity of Samantha's devices that would be difficult to explain away.Can anyone verify this?
 
They say they believe "more parties are involved in her disappearance"

Maybe other pings from phones belonging to more than one person.JMO

It just seems unusual to hint at "more parties" MOO
This has been driving me nuts, this nonsense being repeated by the media.

This is the real, actual quote:
"We are keeping an open mind, but believe the most likely scenario is that her disappearance involves one or more parties,” Detective Acting Superintendent Mark Hatt said.

But see what all the sleazy Aus media do? They cut it down to "more parties". Some are saying "more than 1 party". That is completely misrepresenting what the officer said!

All he really said was they don't believe she left on her own, but that someone/some people was involved.

This is all propaganda to support one narrative. I would ask anyone who believes that narrative, is that really your belief, or has it been implanted in your mind by media manipulation?

JMO
 
This has been driving me nuts, this nonsense being repeated by the media.

This is the real, actual quote:
"We are keeping an open mind, but believe the most likely scenario is that her disappearance involves one or more parties,” Detective Acting Superintendent Mark Hatt said.

But see what all the sleazy Aus media do? They cut it down to "more parties". Some are saying "more than 1 party". That is completely misrepresenting what the officer said!

All he really said was they don't believe she left on her own, but that someone/some people was involved.

This is all propaganda to support one narrative. I would ask anyone who believes that narrative, is that really your belief, or has it been implanted in your mind by media manipulation?

JMO

But how would they get the clicks if they don't blatantly misrepresent and quote things out of context?

I am so over the click bait headlines that seem to be the new norm for most media these days. Not just with this case but in general.
 
But how would they get the clicks if they don't blatantly misrepresent and quote things out of context?

I am so over the click bait headlines that seem to be the new norm for most media these days. Not just with this case but in general.
Yes, I don't follow those kinds of outlets myself, I only see them on here cited as MSM, therefore presumed to be factual.
 

Those joining the search are combing through bushland near an area of interest identified by authorities this week.

Close to 200 people gathered this morning at Ballarat's Eureka Stockade Memorial Park to take part in the bushland search, picking up supplies and high-vis vests before setting off.

The search is moving through bushland east of the suburb of Mount Clear, where authorities have had a renewed focus based on phone data during the investigation.
 


The source was from ABC news that I was referring to.

I was under the impression that generally ABC tries to stick to baseline facts. But I have no real way of verifying this. JMO

I was wondering if they did really think it was possible more that one person was involved or just a general statement??

I don't think they usually allude to that in other missing people cases, they have POI's but not necessarily 2 acting together as they are inferring.

But I understand things can get taken out of context and misconstrued. I just thought maybe there was some clues to implicate more than one person. IMO
 
This has been driving me nuts, this nonsense being repeated by the media.

This is the real, actual quote:
"We are keeping an open mind, but believe the most likely scenario is that her disappearance involves one or more parties,” Detective Acting Superintendent Mark Hatt said.

But see what all the sleazy Aus media do? They cut it down to "more parties". Some are saying "more than 1 party". That is completely misrepresenting what the officer said!

All he really said was they don't believe she left on her own, but that someone/some people was involved.

This is all propaganda to support one narrative. I would ask anyone who believes that narrative, is that really your belief, or has it been implanted in your mind by media manipulation?

JMO
Agree! In this case we have had little actual info to go one. I have relied on police interviews. We are supposed to be quoting msm but it is easy to see how journos spin a story from the actual words that were spoken. Guess the journos know more than they can tell us, but they should not be providing misinformation. They are not being investigative journalists and should be reporting accurately.
 


The source was from ABC news that I was referring to.

I was under the impression that generally ABC tries to stick to baseline facts. But I have no real way of verifying this. JMO

I was wondering if they did really think it was possible more that one person was involved or just a general statement??

I don't think they usually allude to that in other missing people cases, they have POI's but not necessarily 2 acting together as they are inferring.

But I understand things can get taken out of context and misconstrued. I just thought maybe there was some clues to implicate more than one person. IMO
Would be a bit difficult for one person to get Sam into a car. Especially if she was deceased. Dead weight. Maybe that was the police assumption.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
3,902
Total visitors
4,084

Forum statistics

Threads
591,380
Messages
17,951,083
Members
228,485
Latest member
odinsgrl
Back
Top