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]

He was dating his estranged bikie Father?? Ewwww. That is some wild imagination

Lean into the absurd

 

[Terrafirma]

Didn’t take long for this thread to go downhill once again….

Has it what..!

 

[MsTeschmacher]

So what's your theory of why they wouldn't arrest an accessory to murder?

Perhaps if there actually is an accomplice the police may monitor them in the hope of evidence to find SMs body? Not sure there is an accomplice though.

 

[thumbs_up]

Perhaps if there actually is an accomplice the police may monitor them in the hope of evidence to find SMs body? Not sure there is an accomplice though.

I doubt it too. At this stage the police would be better off charging them and cutting a deal if they reveal the location. But there is no one else involved - I'm just curious as to why/how people still believe it at this stage.

 

[Zidane98]

He was at a family birthday party the night before, maybe someone said something quietly to him to spark his murderous rage?
I don’t feel this is random and tonight it hit me how similar they looked , like some kind of family resemblance and as someone that didn’t grow up with my biological family but met them later in life , I subconsciously look for family resemblance.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous speculation and if there were even a slight possibility of it being true the media would have been all over it ages ago as it would have driven a click frenzy.

 

[Zidane98]

Perhaps if there actually is an accomplice the police may monitor them in the hope of evidence to find SMs body? Not sure there is an accomplice though.

You would think any possible accomplice would be charged by now as it would help the case against POS too.


Besides, the chances of anyone who knows where SM's body is revealing its location now are next to nothing. The time for that would have been the initial interview before an alleged perp had time to lawyer up so to speak.

 

[Zidane98]

He isn't going anywhere for a considerable time but with the law nowadays it's no surprise things take so long. Digital Data which includes CCTV plays a huge part in trials nowadays. It creates complications but remember the significance of DNA. Digital Data is just another tool for the Prosecution. As for DNA whilst there has been no mention I'm tipping they have DNA relating to Stephenson IMO.

I agree. There's no harm in speculation what the cops might have on POS. Whatever it is I am pretty confident it is more than simply POS's mobile phone data placing him in the area at the same time SM disappeared.

 

[31550]

I thought police were handing the cctv footage in coming days and the 3 months is for the defence to go over the brief of evidence.

My understanding (from the media reports) is that it was the prosecution who asked for more time to go over the "unprecedented" amount of evidence including CCTV.

I'm not sure but I don't believe this evidence has to be released to the defence prior to the committal hearing. It would certainly have to be handed over prior to the commencement of any trial, and then I expect the defence would be entitled to a similar amount of time to review the evidence and prepare their defence before the trial actually commences.

I wonder how much CCTV could actually be relevant? Surely not much more than the 48 hours following Samantha's disappearance. How many possible cameras would be relevant? Maybe a dozen active CCTV cameras in various key locations? Assuming these cameras run 24/7 and are not motion-sensitive this theoretically gives about 600 hours of footage to be reviewed. Assuming it is viewed in 'real-time' this is about 4 months work for a single operator working full-time. However, police have automated techniques where they can cut out long periods of CCTV where nothing happens.

I just don't think it takes more than 3 months to review the available CCTV evidence and determine whether it's relevant or not. I think the prosecution at this stage do not have all the evidence they would like to take to the committal hearing.

 

[Edna Mode]

I doubt it too. At this stage the police would be better off charging them and cutting a deal if they reveal the location. But there is no one else involved - I'm just curious as to why/how people still believe it at this stage.

I am curious that a young guy of 22 could be so thorougher as to hide her body, but then why casually throw her phone with all her ID into a dam on a property. Have the police linked him to there ? How long has the phone been in the dam ? Could it been recently put in there?
If she was running that morning, why haven't the police shown any images of what type of running shoes, colour, brand etc she was wearing, a more detailed image of her pants, ear pods, watch and her phone, brand-case etc (at the time)

Sometimes police use a mannequin resembling a missing person, wearing the same clothes to show to the public, to keep an eye out. This hasn't happened or no media coverage.
Why haven't the police found a missing running shoe of hers in the bush ? A sock ? Hat ? Drinkbottle ?
Why isn't there any date, time on that one plain still photo of her holding a bag of looking dog poo in her hand, from the home security camera, which doesn't show her bottom attire very well or her footwear (running shoes) importantly !

Presuming this 'unprecedented amount of evidence'does goes to trial, we don't know what could eventuate then

 

[thumbs_up]

I am curious that a young guy of 22 could be so thorougher as to hide her body, but then why casually throw her phone with all her ID into a dam on a property. Have the police linked him to there ? How long has the phone been in the dam ? Could it been recently put in there?
If she was running that morning, why haven't the police shown any images of what type of running shoes, colour, brand etc she was wearing, a more detailed image of her pants, ear pods, watch and her phone, brand-case etc (at the time)

Sometimes police use a mannequin resembling a missing person, wearing the same clothes to show to the public, to keep an eye out. This hasn't happened or no media coverage.
Why haven't the police found a missing running shoe of hers in the bush ? A sock ? Hat ? Drinkbottle ?
Why isn't there any date, time on that one plain still photo of her holding a bag of looking dog poo in her hand, from the home security camera, which doesn't show her bottom attire very well or her footwear (running shoes) importantly !

Presuming this 'unprecedented amount of evidence'does goes to trial, we don't know what could eventuate then

What's your theory though? You seem to have been implying in previous posts that there is someone connected to the murder that police have chosen not to arrest. Please elaborate on your thoughts...

 

[Edna Mode]

What's your theory though? You seem to have been implying in previous posts that there is someone connected to the murder that police have chosen not to arrest. Please elaborate on your thoughts...

What's your theory though? You seem to have been implying in previous posts that there is someone connected to the murder that police have chosen not to arrest. Please elaborate on your thoughts...

I never said that. I said If he's had help, maybe tempted to roll over, or further evidence comes to light with any others now. It will depend on what his lawyer finds on the hard drive she will receive over the weekend.

 

[Underarrest_]

My understanding (from the media reports) is that it was the prosecution who asked for more time to go over the "unprecedented" amount of evidence including CCTV.

I'm not sure but I don't believe this evidence has to be released to the defence prior to the committal hearing. It would certainly have to be handed over prior to the commencement of any trial, and then I expect the defence would be entitled to a similar amount of time to review the evidence and prepare their defence before the trial actually commences.

I wonder how much CCTV could actually be relevant? Surely not much more than the 48 hours following Samantha's disappearance. How many possible cameras would be relevant? Maybe a dozen active CCTV cameras in various key locations? Assuming these cameras run 24/7 and are not motion-sensitive this theoretically gives about 600 hours of footage to be reviewed. Assuming it is viewed in 'real-time' this is about 4 months work for a single operator working full-time. However, police have automated techniques where they can cut out long periods of CCTV where nothing happens.

I just don't think it takes more than 3 months to review the available CCTV evidence and determine whether it's relevant or not. I think the prosecution at this stage do not have all the evidence they would like to take to the committal hearing.

I’m only going by the media I’ve read but the defence will need this time to go through the brief of evidence including cctv. A brief of evidence includes a lot of detail, witness statement, details of arrest, background and evidence. They would have been accumulating evidence as they were going.
Defence would have received the brief of evidence two weeks before the hearing but seemingly not the supporting cctv (which would already be worded in the brief) ( I’m assuming the cctv is to link the evidence with what’s in the brief.)
The cctv could include the footage at his home/ other residence, areas he’s travelled, work or maybe footage of a period of time of the crime scene (to see if he returned) and any dashcam. Not sure if they’re talking about audio as well which might be from the car, his home/ other residence, also work/phone interceptions.
Depending on how much evidence they have, I can understand it might be quite big.
Time will tell as you have said earlier as to the quality over quantity of evidence but my personal feeling is that if they can determine Sam’s death and connect it to a person in a short amount of time, they have some crucial evidence.
Unfortunately it’s going to be a long wait to see how much evidence they have and if it’s enough to convict.

 

[31550]

I’m only going by the media I’ve read but the defence will need this time to go through the brief of evidence including cctv. A brief of evidence includes a lot of detail, witness statement, details of arrest, background and evidence. They would have been accumulating evidence as they were going.
Defence would have received the brief of evidence two weeks before the hearing but seemingly not the supporting cctv (which would already be worded in the brief) ( I’m assuming the cctv is to link the evidence with what’s in the brief.)
The cctv could include the footage at his home/ other residence, areas he’s travelled, work or maybe footage of a period of time of the crime scene (to see if he returned) and any dashcam. Not sure if they’re talking about audio as well which might be from the car, his home/ other residence, also work/phone interceptions.
Depending on how much evidence they have, I can understand it might be quite big.
Time will tell as you have said earlier as to the quality over quantity of evidence but my personal feeling is that if they can determine Sam’s death and connect it to a person in a short amount of time, they have some crucial evidence.
Unfortunately it’s going to be a long wait to see how much evidence they have and if it’s enough to convict.

Notwithstanding all the above, am I correct that it was the prosecution who asked for extra time?
This, along with their failure to deliver all the relevant CCTV to the defence before the committal hearing would seem to indicate that the prosecution don't have enough to go to trial (right now), and need more time to finalise the brief.
At this stage they haven't even presented enough evidence for the case to go to trial.

 

[Edna Mode]

Notwithstanding all the above, am I correct that it was the prosecution who asked for extra time?
This, along with their failure to deliver all the relevant CCTV to the defence before the committal hearing would seem to indicate that the prosecution don't have enough to go to trial (right now), and need more time to finalise the brief.
At this stage they haven't even presented enough evidence for the case to go to trial.

The prosecution told the court both parties were seeking at least a 12 week adjournment due to a "significant amount of time" needed to go through a lengthy brief of evidence.
She requested at least a 12-week adjournment, a move also supported by the prosecution.

"Given the huge amount of material to be gone through and taking instruction from Mr Stephenson, that is an adequate amount of time in our submission," Ms O'Brien said.

This was delivered to his legal team on July 25, allowing them two weeks to review the case and seek instructions. His lawyer, Moya O'Brien, said that both parties were seeking a three-month adjournment due to the sheer amount of evidence in the brief. “It has been described as unprecedented,” she said.

 

[Underarrest_]

Notwithstanding all the above, am I correct that it was the prosecution who asked for extra time?
This, along with their failure to deliver all the relevant CCTV to the defence before the committal hearing would seem to indicate that the prosecution don't have enough to go to trial (right now), and need more time to finalise the brief.
At this stage they haven't even presented enough evidence for the case to go to trial.

Just from what I’ve read, I believe the prosecutor asked for more time and was going to have the cctv to the defence within a few days and the defence have also said they want three months to go over it.
The defence would already have had the brief handed to them which includes the evidence.
As an example, something like “ the respondent drove to .........the crime site at.......on the........two weeks after the alleged crime and picked up a ..........would be in the brief.
The Cctv which of course is part of the the brief, of him doing that, would support what’s written in the brief.
Whether there’s enough evidence (in the brief of evidence) or not won’t be determined until the next hearing in three months.
I’m also assuming they would include a large amount of cctv because they also have to show that there was no one else who could have committed the crime, for example, if they have cctv of POS at the crime site at the exact time Sam was there, they would want to show that no one else was in the area at that time or be able to rule them out.

 

[31550]

Just from what I’ve read, I believe the prosecutor asked for more time and was going to have the cctv to the defence within a few days and the defence have also said they want three months to go over it.
The defence would already have had the brief handed to them which includes the evidence.
As an example, something like “ the respondent drove to .........the crime site at.......on the........two weeks after the alleged crime and picked up a ..........would be in the brief.
The Cctv of him doing that would support that.
Whether there’s enough evidence (in the brief of evidence) or not won’t be determined until the next hearing in three months.
I’m also assuming they would include a large amount of cctv because they also have to show that there was no one else who could have committed the crime, for example, if they have cctv of POS at the crime site at the exact time Sam was there, they would want to show that no one else was in the area at that time or be able to rule them out.

If they had already selected and identified the CCTV evidence supporting their brief, what prevented the prosecution delivering either this selected footage, or simply all the CCTV footage (with identification of the bits they want to enter into evidence) to the defence on the 25th July with the brief?
Clearly, the prosecution have not finalised their position on exactly what CCTV footage (and other evidence) they will be seeking to accompany the brief and subsequently enter into evidence. They're not ready to go to trial.
What happens if they come back in three months time and still aren't ready?

 

[Edna Mode]

If they had already selected and identified the CCTV evidence supporting their brief, what prevented the prosecution delivering either this selected footage, or simply all the CCTV footage (with identification of the bits they want to enter into evidence) to the defence on the 25th July with the brief?
Clearly, the prosecution have not finalised their position on exactly what CCTV footage (and other evidence) they will be seeking to accompany the brief and subsequently enter into evidence. They're not ready to go to trial.
What happens if they come back in three months time and still aren't ready?

It sounds like his defence is not ready. The police were given originally 20 weeks to prepare their brief of evidence against POS. This was then delivered to his legal team on the 25th July, allowing them two weeks to review the case with any instructions.
Because of the unprecedented size, his lawyer needs more time to review, and the prosecutors have agreed upon

 

[31550]

It sounds like his defence is not ready. The police were given originally 20 weeks to prepare their brief of evidence against POS. This was then delivered to his legal team on the 25th July, allowing them two weeks to review the case with any instructions.
Because of the unprecedented size, his lawyer needs more time to review, and the prosecutors have agreed upon

The defence don't have to be 'ready' for a committal hearing. They only have to be ready for a trial.

 

[Lady O]

The defence don't have to be 'ready' for a committal hearing. They only have to be ready for a trial.

Maybe they need to be ready to advise their client on his plea?

 

[Underarrest_]

The defence don't have to be 'ready' for a committal hearing. They only have to be ready for a trial.

From what we know, the defence have received the brief of evidence and will have the supporting Cctv in coming days, the defence will then have three months to go over it before the next hearing.
The defence themselves have said the brief of evidence is huge. I feel the prosecution are ready to go to trial if need be.

 

[Underarrest_]

Maybe they need to be ready to advise their client on his plea?

Yes I feel the defence don’t want to go into a trial (if it does) blindly neither.

 

[31550]

Yes I feel the defence don’t want to go into a trial (if it does) blindly neither.

The defence obviously don't want to go to trial at all. And they should not even be talking about a plea until they have seen the brief of evidence in its entirety.

If I was the magistrate, I'd be asking the prosecution if they were ready, with a complete brief of evidence to hand over to the defence. Either they are or they are not. If they said they were ready, and I found the brief of evidence to be incomplete, then I would be setting the charges aside. Otherwise, I'd be setting a trial date far enough out to give the defence team time to review the brief.

At the moment it seems like the prosecution are just delaying and wasting everyone's time.

 

[Underarrest_]

The defence obviously don't want to go to trial at all. And they should not even be talking about a plea until they have seen the brief of evidence in its entirety.

If I was the magistrate, I'd be asking the prosecution if they were ready, with a complete brief of evidence to hand over to the defence. Either they are or they are not. If they said they were ready, and I found the brief of evidence to be incomplete, then I would be setting the charges aside. Otherwise, I'd be setting a trial date far enough out to give the defence team time to review the brief.

At the moment it seems like the prosecution are just delaying and wasting everyone's time.

That’s your opinion and you’re welcome to that. This is why the defence need to see the brief of evidence. You contradicted yourself. I’m assuming the huge brief has some evidence in it.
Time will tell if they’re wasting everyone’s time.

 

[GrayRanga]

cdsa

The defence don't have to be 'ready' for a committal hearing. They only have to be ready for a trial.

Sorry.

The defence have to know the evidence that the Crown is using to argue that the accused should go to trial.

Rules of Natural Justice and fairness and that old fashioned stuff that Courts and definitely Appeal Courts hold in high regard

 

[FrankGrimes]

The defence obviously don't want to go to trial at all. And they should not even be talking about a plea until they have seen the brief of evidence in its entirety.

If I was the magistrate, I'd be asking the prosecution if they were ready, with a complete brief of evidence to hand over to the defence. Either they are or they are not. If they said they were ready, and I found the brief of evidence to be incomplete, then I would be setting the charges aside. Otherwise, I'd be setting a trial date far enough out to give the defence team time to review the brief.

At the moment it seems like the prosecution are just delaying and wasting everyone's time.

The defense asked for a 12-week adjournment which was supported by the pros., the CCTV is due to be handed over this weekend, how are they wasting everybody's time? both the defense and pros are on the same page with the amount of CCTV which needs to be reviewed.