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

 

[Zing13]

Not exactly the same but thinking back to Melisa Hoskins who was hit by her husband while he was driving his car, he was charged with "causing death by dangerous driving, driving without due care and endangering life"

This was not murder. Hence not hit and run in this case

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Yes! People often refuse to believe that rape isn't about sex, it's about power.

And hate.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

We should be thankful that one of those neo-Nazi's has a conscience

Yeah, that's the part of that story I find the most unbelievable

A neo-Nazi with a conscience?

 

[Flash of power]

Again, we don't know what evidence the cops have.

you are right, we don't , but I am trying to put the case across that they must have a truckload to have pressed murder charges without a body and without him talking

 

[Barrybran]

Again, we don't know what evidence the cops have.

Flash of power is correct though. The onus is on the prosecution to make their case. At some point, the defense will have access to some of the evidence and the defense either negotiates their position of the case goes to trial.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Not exactly the same but thinking back to Melisa Hoskins who was hit by her husband while he was driving his car, he was charged with "causing death by dangerous driving, driving without due care and endangering life"

This was not murder. Hence not hit and run in this case

I wonder how or why he wasn't charged with murder. Didn't he intentionally hit her with his car? Causing her death?

 

[Tony Harrison]

I wonder how or why he wasn't charged with murder. Didn't he intentionally hit her with his car? Causing her death?

I think she was on his car trying to stop him leaving and he drove off, neglecting her safety, but not with intent to kill her.

 

[Lady O]

100% agree.

Well, except for the sexual aspect of it, I suppose. But that aside - it's not about sex at all.

Domination. Degradation. Make yourself feel powerful, by making them feel powerless.

 

[Iwonder]

But the victims don't reflect that.

According to ABS Recorded Crime - Victims data, in 2018, police recorded around 7,900 sexual assaultsagainst children aged 0–14 at the time of being reported to police. This equates to a rate of 167.6 sexualassaults recorded per 100,000 children, a higher rate than for people aged 15 and over (based on ABS2019). Rates of sexual assault were:• 4 times as high for children aged 10–14 as for those aged 0–9 (338.4 sexual assaults per 100,000children compared with 85.9 per 100,000)• 3.5 times as high for girls as for boys (266.8 sexual assaults per 100,000 girls, compared with 72.3 per100,000 boys) (Figure 5).

https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/03...a/aihw-fdv-5.pdf?v=20230605172455&inline=true

[In America]

• Ages 12-34 are the highest risk years for rape and sexual assault.3
• Those age 65 and older are 92% less likely than 12-24 year olds to be a victim of rape or sexual assault, and 83% less likely than 25-49 year olds.4

Victims of Sexual Violence: Statistics | RAINN

I'd suggest that victim age and sexual attractiveness is a much more significant factor than you realise.

You’re entitled to your opinion but these stats are about age, not sexual attractiveness.

 

[31550]

I wonder how or why he wasn't charged with murder. Didn't he intentionally hit her with his car? Causing her death?

That alone would not be murder. Culpable driving possibly.

 

[annawinter608]

According to ABS Recorded Crime - Victims data, in 2018, police recorded around 7,900 sexual assaultsagainst children aged 0–14 at the time of being reported to police. This equates to a rate of 167.6 sexualassaults recorded per 100,000 children, a higher rate than for people aged 15 and over (based on ABS2019). Rates of sexual assault were:• 4 times as high for children aged 10–14 as for those aged 0–9 (338.4 sexual assaults per 100,000children compared with 85.9 per 100,000)• 3.5 times as high for girls as for boys (266.8 sexual assaults per 100,000 girls, compared with 72.3 per100,000 boys) (Figure 5).

https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/03...a/aihw-fdv-5.pdf?v=20230605172455&inline=true

[In America]

• Ages 12-34 are the highest risk years for rape and sexual assault.3
• Those age 65 and older are 92% less likely than 12-24 year olds to be a victim of rape or sexual assault, and 83% less likely than 25-49 year olds.4

Victims of Sexual Violence: Statistics | RAINN

I'd suggest that victim age and sexual attractiveness is a much more significant factor than you realise.

Did you see the bit about reported sexual assaults being higher against those under 14 than those aged 15 and over?

Sexual assaults in men’s prisons is interesting as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Feerits Elf]

Incorrect, there are three elements and ticks all of them in this scenario

Voluntarily committed acts which caused the victim’s death;

Had the intention to kill, or cause really serious injury or knowing it was probable that death or serious injury would result; and

Had no lawful justification or defence for those acts.

Drove a car hitting them ticks off on the first, putting a badly injured person in.the boo and getting rid of them to protect yourself ticks both 1st and 2nd. Clear murder case, although some judge will work their hardest to find a way to let him off light.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

No, it fails on the second element (the mens rea). No intent to kill when he strikes her with the car, and no knowledge that it was probable that death would occur by dumping her somewhere because he thought she was already dead.

 

[sydney_gws]

That depends - are any coppers reading this thread who would chase up a drink-driving offence from 40 years ago?
Just suppose for a moment that I did, and that I hit something like a tree - then I would leave the scene as quickly as possible, and not hang around. If I hit a person I would stop and try to render assistance no matter how pissed I was. If I killed them I would probably panic, but I certainly wouldn't pick them up and put them in my vehicle and drive elsewhere to conceal their body - that would be about the last thing on my mind.

He might have been on drugs or drunk, and knew the police would test for that.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

That alone would not be murder. Culpable driving possibly.

This POS was charged with murder

'You knew full well what you were doing': Bourke St driver gets at least 46 years

James Gargasoulas is sentenced to a minimum of 46 years in prison for killing six people and injuring 27 others when he drove his car through pedestrians two years ago.

www.abc.net.au

As have others who used their car as a weapon killing their victims.

 

[31550]

This POS was charged with murder

'You knew full well what you were doing': Bourke St driver gets at least 46 years

James Gargasoulas is sentenced to a minimum of 46 years in prison for killing six people and injuring 27 others when he drove his car through pedestrians two years ago.

www.abc.net.au

As have others who used their car as a weapon killing their victims.

Yes but in this case it is just conjecture that the car was used at all, and with no eye witnesses or CCTV, it would be problematic proving intent to kill and reasonable knowledge that these actions would kill. Without a body or a proven motive, there's nothing to prove this is a murder.

 

[Tandy]

Makes you wonder wtf went wrong for someone with every opportunity at 22 now charged with murder. Evidence will come out obv but if she set out for a run where was he and what was he doing. Did she make it to the national park area? Did he follow her. Her body has to be out there or in vicinity. So sad. Feel for her family. And the young maan charged family.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Yes but in this case it is just conjecture that the car was used at all, and with no eye witnesses or CCTV, it would be problematic proving intent to kill and reasonable knowledge that these actions would kill. Without a body or a proven motive, there's nothing to prove this is a murder.

We don't know what evidence they have as yet.

 

[FTY1]

Herald Sun suggesting she was struck by a car …View attachment 1922726

Says "one line of Inquiry" that indicates there are other possibilities.

 

[Pamcake1]

• No comment on whether a car or motorbike was involved, but this was a deliberate act.

I know you know all this Awakening and the below is not aimed at you.....just hanging off your post if you will permit as it is a well done reminder as to what BunkMoreland has also pointed out here.

Naturally they would have taken the car for forensics.
If the alledged offender moved the body it's doubtful he did it on roller skates or a wheel barrow.
And after that I refer also to the above comment attached.

They would have taken shoes, clothes and more than a few other things.
People seem to be stuck on motive and means when patience is required.

As Chief Commissioner Patten said at the start of the press conference he was doing this because there was inordinate interest in the case from the public.
This press conference was one of the first I've ever seen for a single murder case since Jill M.
He certainly conducted it with a firm hand and was not going to jeopardise the case, unlike possibly what happened at a similar presser in Sydney the week before.

It makes me feel ill, with what seems like further rampant speculation, false narratives, gleefully being parsed willy nilly without consideration, when there are people, families, communities hurting out there and Samantha Murphy is still out there somewhere.

I sincerely hope that people hold it in their minds when they launch into yet another diatribe.
She has not been found and that should be the main focus right now, as was the direction by Patten clearly stated no less than three times in the press conference.

 

[Feerits Elf]

Says "one line of Inquiry" that indicates there are other possibilities.

No, it indicates that that's the one that's been leaked to them.

 

[31550]

We don't know what evidence they have as yet.

We know they have laid murder charges. I am just saying they will need more than a theory that the offender hit Samantha with his car to lay murder charges. They will need a motive, and evidence of things like direction and speed of the vehicle and exact location with respect to the victim. Otherwise they cannot prove intent. Even if they can prove he moved the body, that is not evidence of murder.

 

[Pamcake1]

Definitely. Older women are less likely to be attacked.

That is an absolute bullshit statement backed up with nothing but your opinion.
Countless older woman have been targetted and have died in the past decade that I can think of immediately.
95 year old attacked and r*ped in a nursing home, never recovered, died shortly after.......NSW, SA, VIC, QLD have all had similar stories.

Older women are not less likely to be attacked.

All this counting victims of violence as statistics....arguing about statistics....arguing about theoretical target of crime through profiling.
Each one of these numbers, stats, profilings is a human that suffered.

 

[FTY1]

So in USA (or some states there at least), they must release the probable cause document pubically so everyone has access to see why the charge occurred. In Australia is there anything similar? If not isn't it possible the police charge with lack of evidence and there's nothing anyone can do about it until a hearing with the a judge who throws the case out?

In Australia, there doesn't have to be a public document. Normally there is a press conference for more serious matters. Police have to provide a brief of evidence to the Office of the Public Prosecution for serious matters. These are for the Director of Public Prosecutor. They generally decide if there is enough evidence to provide the courts based on the likelihood of a conviction. It is not in their interest to have people declared not guilty if there isn't enough evidence.

There are also several stages before it gets to trial going through lower courts before they get to higher ones.

Our role - Office of Public Prosecutions

Our role We deliver high quality prosecutions independently, fairly and efficiently Home On this page The types of crimes the OPP prosecute The OPP’s obligations towards victims of crime After a case is referred to the OPP The prosecution test The people who represent the DPP in court Other...

www.opp.vic.gov.au

The defence has to be given the full brief of evidence. I am not sure at what stage that is.

 

[kaiserchief13]

In Australia, there doesn't have to be a public document. Normally there is a press conference for more serious matters. Police have to provide a brief of evidence to the Office of the Public Prosecution for serious matters. These are for the Director of Public Prosecutor. They generally decide if there is enough evidence to provide the courts based on the likelihood of a conviction. It is not in their interest to have people declared not guilty if there isn't enough evidence.

There are also several stages before it gets to trial going through lower courts before they get to higher ones.

Our role - Office of Public Prosecutions

Our role We deliver high quality prosecutions independently, fairly and efficiently Home On this page The types of crimes the OPP prosecute The OPP’s obligations towards victims of crime After a case is referred to the OPP The prosecution test The people who represent the DPP in court Other...

www.opp.vic.gov.au

The defence has to be given the full brief of evidence. I am not sure at what stage that is.

But then hypothetically can't police charge someone with something which then gets thrown out, but the defendant has already been in remand between time of arrest and when case gets thrown out. Not really fair on defendant is it?

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

We know they have laid murder charges. I am just saying they will need more than a theory that the offender hit Samantha with his car to lay murder charges. They will need a motive, and evidence of things like direction and speed of the vehicle and exact location with respect to the victim. Otherwise they cannot prove intent. Even if they can prove he moved the body, that is not evidence of murder.

Yep. And it will be very interesting to find out what evidence they currently have. Because I doubt they would have charged him with murder based only on a theory.