Samantha Murphy Ballarat * Patrick Orren Stephenson Charged With Murder

[Kurve]

Here are the crime board rules of engagement. Please read them.

Importantly, 'sub judice' means that a case is under consideration by the courts. 'Sub judice contempt' can occur if information is published that may be prejudicial to the court proceedings.

Don't spread baseless rumours or state as fact that which is opinion, please.

A degree of respect in all discussion across this board is expected.

Rules - Updated Crime Board Rules - READ BEFORE POSTING

General Information The BigFooty Crime board is a community that fosters discussion on current and past crimes, some which have social and media notoriety, that attracts the attention of public opinion and discussion on such matters. Please read these rules very carefully, both the Big Footy...

www.bigfooty.com

The Murder of Rebecca Young - Ballarat

The Murder of Hannah McGuire - Ballarat * Lachie Young

17

Lachie Young

Age

25

Ht

189cm

Wt

81kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.5

3star

K

6.4

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

1.8

4star

MG

220.3

3star

D

9.0

2star

K

5.5

2star

HB

3.5

2star

M

1.0

1star

T

2.0

3star

MG

210.0

3star

D

11.2

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

5.0

4star

M

3.8

4star

T

1.8

4star

MG

219.6

4star

charged



Allegedly

 

[thumbs_up]

Not sure if you can be taken to court for "general consensus "

What's that got to do with the price of fish in Madagascar?

 

[thumbs_up]

Feels like an addiction at this point. I need help

 

[mrskafoops]

I wonder if POS is an anger excitation rapist? Maybe he was doing his thing and it ended up with Samantha dead?

 

[mrskafoops]

Certainly won't be easy.
Couple of points 1. Not necessarily
Police long suspected Milat had an accomplice but was enough to conviction him based on evidence and what was found via warrant.
Point 2 this will be biggest hurdle. Never mind the body but without DNA/a possession even signs of a physical act from him whole thing is a mystery
Still people have been convicted without bodies.
Point 3 yep. Even now without been grim if they find a body it may be too late to determine cause of death. Only reason they could in the pilot case was because independent fragments of skull were found and there is no other reasonable explanation.
But yeah my point was you can convict on indirect evidence but a hell of a lot adds up
In other cases mentioned it was at least proven the convicted and victim were together/last person scene. Here at this point there appears nothing.
Did the police jump the gun under pressure for results?

Have the police actually confirmed this - “it was at least proven the convicted and victim were together/last person scene”

 

[Underarrest_]

What's that got to do with the price of fish in Madagascar?

FYI. It’s between US$ 7.79 and US$ 14.61 per kilogram.

 

[Underarrest_]

In another murder thread of the two campers, the prosecution don't seem to have a motive, but do have the remains of the bodies and possibly one of the murder weapons.
In SM's case you're suggesting police may have uncovered a motive but there is no body.
Police probably can prove a murder without a body and prove a murder without a motive.
But watching these two murder cases is extraordinary and I can see how people get off with the murder charge and perhaps get a manslaughter sentence or sometimes let off free.
In both cases, I think the police have laid the charges too early.
In SM's case they should have waited for the body.
In the campers case waited for a motive.
One problem is that they are under pressure from the public who cannot understand why someone hasn't been charged and the police are given a lot of evidence.
I think it was craffles who said the covert surveillance may be good in SM's case and as you say that info wouldn't be much good and I say it would only be good if they were covertly watching the actual alleged murder taking place.
And I'm not sure about your prima facie example being sufficient for a guilty verdict.
It gives us something to talk about anyway and it's all just personal opinions.

I’m with you on the car accident and has just let her die. I believe he panicked and just didn’t want to go to jail.

 

[Underarrest_]

I wonder if POS is an anger excitation rapist? Maybe he was doing his thing and it ended up with Samantha dead?

It’s possible.

 

[shorsky]

I don't see covert surveillance after the incident providing any useful information unless POS was observed disposing of evidence, in which case, where is the evidence now? And what sort of surveillance after the incident could have provided evidence of murder (as in a deliberate act)?

I think this case could be far simpler than people here are suggesting. IF POS is indeed responsible for Samantha's murder as police allege, I suggest that police have discovered a connection between the two (e.g. correspondence?) which suggests a possible motive for POS to deliberately attack SM. This would be enough prima facie evidence for a murder charge even without a body or murder weapon. Police have stated they do not believe there is any connection between POS and the family. They have not explicitly ruled out a connection between Samantha and POS (of which the family may have been unaware). In over 90% of murders, the murderer is known to the victim. Occam's razor.

Left field thought - what is the connection was between SM and another member of POS family. POS may have taken umbridge at that connection, and things may’ve got totally out of hand, leading to the alledged murder.

 

[31550]

I wonder if POS is an anger excitation rapist? Maybe he was doing his thing and it ended up with Samantha dead?

I see my suggestion to keep things simple and follow Occam's Razor has been taken on board

 

[craffles]

RE: surveillance im hypothesising they have some form of admission of guilt, either via actions to clean up after the fact or verbally to others

EG a tapped phone call where he says something like “****ed up, I did the chick that’s on the news” etc.

 

[mrskafoops]

I see my suggestion to keep things simple and follow Occam's Razor has been taken on board

It’s a simple theory. He wanted to rape someone and it went pear-shaped. I was reading the book I posted the photo of last night and thought it might be plausible. TBH if he’s just a kid that accidentally hit a runner and covered it up I would be surprised.

 

[mrskafoops]

Left field thought - what is the connection was between SM and another member of POS family. POS may have taken umbridge at that connection, and things may’ve got totally out of hand, leading to the alledged murder.

What? He found out daddy was having an affair?

 

[CredibleSauce]

It’s a simple theory. He wanted to rape someone and it went pear-shaped. I was reading the book I posted the photo of last night and thought it might be plausible. TBH if he’s just a kid that accidentally hit a runner and covered it up I would be surprised.

The fact that there are tens of posts upon posts here adamant that there must be a reasonable motive does my head in.
Particularly the “but he’s so young, 22 year old boys don’t just x, y or z so it just doesn’t add up!!!” category of hypothesising.
Are we forgetting that 22 year olds are fully grown adult men?
And given A normal male testosterone level peaks at about age 20, and On average, peak strength is usually attained… between the ages of 20 and 30 in untrained men, it appears to be a perfectly reasonable age for someone driven to randomly murder a stranger to follow through on that impulse.
And not that this alleged homicide is the work of a current or potential SK, but in terms of random attacks with no clear motivator, research like this suggests serial killers are mostly white males in their 20s or 30s, of above average intelligence, who usually commit intra-racial murders of strangers so it’s not completely unheard of for a woman to become a victim of a random, violent attacker.

Just IMO of course.

 

[thumbs_up]

The fact that there are tens of posts upon posts here adamant that there must be a reasonable motive does my head in.
Particularly the “but he’s so young, 22 year old boys don’t just x, y or z so it just doesn’t add up!!!” category of hypothesising.
Are we forgetting that 22 year olds are fully grown adult men?
And given A normal male testosterone level peaks at about age 20, and On average, peak strength is usually attained… between the ages of 20 and 30 in untrained men, it appears to be a perfectly reasonable age for someone driven to randomly murder a stranger to follow through on that impulse.
And not that this alleged homicide is the work of a current or potential SK, but in terms of random attacks with no clear motivator, research like this suggests serial killers are mostly white males in their 20s or 30s, of above average intelligence, who usually commit intra-racial murders of strangers so it’s not completely unheard of for a woman to become a victim of a random, violent attacker.

Just IMO of course.

This is the simplest explanation

 

[31550]

This is the simplest explanation

For an attack, probably. For a murder, not. (My opinion).

 

[Awakening]

The fact that there are tens of posts upon posts here adamant that there must be a reasonable motive does my head in.
Particularly the “but he’s so young, 22 year old boys don’t just x, y or z so it just doesn’t add up!!!” category of hypothesising.
Are we forgetting that 22 year olds are fully grown adult men?
And given A normal male testosterone level peaks at about age 20, and On average, peak strength is usually attained… between the ages of 20 and 30 in untrained men, it appears to be a perfectly reasonable age for someone driven to randomly murder a stranger to follow through on that impulse.
And not that this alleged homicide is the work of a current or potential SK, but in terms of random attacks with no clear motivator, research like this suggests serial killers are mostly white males in their 20s or 30s, of above average intelligence, who usually commit intra-racial murders of strangers so it’s not completely unheard of for a woman to become a victim of a random, violent attacker.

Just IMO of course.

Same. It’s goes round and round in circles. A 22 year old is perfectly capable of murdering a woman and disposing of the body all by himself.

I don’t know if that’s what’s happened here but it’s a possibility. You only have to read the news occasionally to know that.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Not sure if you can be taken to court for "general consensus "

As long as it’s the jury with the consensus.

 

[31550]

As long as it’s the jury with the consensus.

A jury must reach a unanimous verdict. Not consensus.

 

[thumbs_up]

A jury must reach a unanimous verdict. Not consensus.

90% of this thread is people arguing about the meaning of words.

 

[Underarrest_]

I think the damaged car thing comes from Police Statements that said this "They are renewing calls for anyone who has information relevant to the investigation - whether it be a person or vehicle seen in the area that day, or something unusual such as a damaged vehicle or property - to come forward to police." As you can see this could easily be confused while reading over it.

Thankyou Terrafirma, I accept that the police didn’t specifically state that they were looking for a particular car with damage, rather asking anyone to come forward if they have seen any car/person or car/property with damage.
In my opinion, there is relevance to this statement and my interpretation might be different to others.
In my opinion there was a reason the under investigation show (which has been mentioned in here by others previously) aired so quickly. It would normally takes months to put an episode together.
It’s also my opinion that a vehicle which might have been similar to that of a specific interest, might have been shown towards the end of the show. The panel asked for the public to watch the show very closely and phone with any information.
IMO.

 

[31550]

90% of this thread is people arguing about the meaning of words.

That might be true, but there is a huge and important difference between the meanings of "unanimous" and consensus, and they cannot be used interchangeably.
Juries must make decisions unanimously. There is no room for consensus.

 

[31550]

Thankyou Terrafirma, I accept that the police didn’t specifically state that they were looking for a particular car with damage, rather asking anyone to come forward if they have seen any car/person or car/property with damage.
In my opinion, there is relevance to this statement and my interpretation might be different to others.
In my opinion there was a reason the under investigation show (which has been mentioned in here by others previously) aired so quickly. It would normally takes months to put an episode together.
It’s also my opinion that a vehicle which might have been similar to that of a specific interest, might have been shown towards the end of the show. The panel asked for the public to watch the show very closely and phone with any information.
IMO.

I don't believe the police use methods such as setting up "Under Investigation" episodes and the like to carry out their investigations. These 'documentaries' are aired by television networks to gain ratings and sell advertising. They are not a de facto arm of the Vic Police Force. They are not designed to solve crimes.
The reason the episode aired so quickly was because it was a 'hot topic' which would gain lots of ratings, as opposed to airing it today when the majority of the community (us excepted) have forgotten about the case.
There's no reason to assume the Under Investigation team were privy to any information from VicPol which hasn't been made public. They are not VicPol spokespersons.

 

[Underarrest_]

I don't believe the police use methods such as setting up "Under Investigation" episodes and the like to carry out their investigations. These 'documentaries' are aired by television networks to gain ratings and sell advertising. They are not a de facto arm of the Vic Police Force. They are not designed to solve crimes.
The reason the episode aired so quickly was because it was a 'hot topic' which would gain lots of ratings, as opposed to airing it today when the majority of the community (us excepted) have forgotten about the case.
There's no reason to assume the Under Investigation team were privy to any information from VicPol which hasn't been made public. They are not VicPol spokespersons.

It’s in my opinion.
You’re entitled/welcome to yours.

 

[jason_recliner]

The police absolutely do use the media, including crime shows and other TV 'specials', to assist them with solving cases.

 

[Awakening]

The police absolutely do use the media, including crime shows and other TV 'specials', to assist them with solving cases.

Exactly. Look at the Greg Lynn case.