craffles
Brownlow Medallist
Cousin liking the limelight a touch?
?????
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Cousin liking the limelight a touch?
Yes, lots of smiles… You just don’t know about people. Could be genuine, nervous, a lot of people seem to react inappropriately when they feel the opposite. Oh well, let’s not judge.I've seen her cousin at least three times on TV giving interviews, a polished performer, hence the question
Best mate of Charlise’s stepdad speaks out
A longtime friend of Charlise Mutten’s stepfather and accused killer, Justin Stein, has spoken out, declaring the 31-year-old “hasn’t got a bad bone in his body”.www.news.com.au
I've seen her cousin at least three times on TV giving interviews, a polished performer, hence the question
The cousin has the same surname as Charlise’s biological father, who I’m sure I read hadn’t seen her since she was a baby. The interviewer didn’t ask when was the last time she saw Charlise or how often.I don't watch a lot of TV so didn't know the cousin was getting involved so much. Anything of note coming from the interviews?
Sadly, people like their piece of 'fame', don't they? All it does is add nothing but confusion and wasted time to the narrative. "Look at me, I know so-and-so" is a symptom of the social media age, and as you say, anyone can claim a relationship, others dispute it, and anyone like most of us on here interested in actual details has to resort to wading through some of this to see if there is any actual merit to their claims.On other social media there are other supposed family members calling out this cousin saying the cousin is full of it, met C once or twice, hasn't seen her in years etc, has ignored family requests to stop talking publicly. Apparently the cousin claims that C was named after her which others are saying is completely false and cousin is a attention seeking headcase. But it's social media so anyone can claim to be a family member or close family friend.
Interview with cousin on abc radio this morn - the cousin said she last saw her when she was 1 year old.The cousin has the same surname as Charlise’s biological father, who I’m sure I read hadn’t seen her since she was a baby. The interviewer didn’t ask when was the last time she saw Charlise or how often.
The part I don’t understand is how they report that KM initially believed JS and then say she was on the phone to him talking about sandbags and boats?Tiny amounts of information trickling out
Charlise’s mum breaks her silence
Charlise Mutten’s mother Kallista reportedly believed her fiance’s account of what happened to her daughter before calling police a day later.www.news.com.au
I don't believe the police know what they were discussing during those calls on the Thursday afternoon, only that were a number of calls between the pair. Using GPS they've then been able to work out where they both were when the calls were made. Not 100% sure but expect she was at the caravan park when calls were made. Maybe she was ringing him asking where her daughter was.The part I don’t understand is how they report that KM initially believed JS and then say she was on the phone to him talking about sandbags and boats?
Yeah, I think as others have said, someone who hasn't seen the kid for 8 years commenting on the situation doesn't really add much, other than adding to their own perception of their self-importance.Interview with cousin on abc radio this morn - the cousin said she last saw her when she was 1 year old.
The part I don’t understand is how they report that KM initially believed JS and then say she was on the phone to him talking about sandbags and boats?
That's a valid point, but isn't speculating on a valid reason why she couldn't make a statement and her possible innocence just the flip-side to deleted posts speculating on her possible guilt? (Sorry, I don't want to labour the point, but I did see several of the posts before they were deleted, and I thought at least some didn't over-step the line, but will leave it there, as I don't want to annoy the moderator too much. )There's a possbility the mother had covid and that's why Charlise was taken to Wildenstein. About a week in hospital where the cops couldn't approach her, fits with the isolation period.
That would make quite a bit of sense. If she did have covid she was trying to protect Charlise by sending her to Wildenstein, not negligently putting her in danger. Could have also contributed to her medical episode.There's a possbility the mother had covid and that's why Charlise was taken to Wildenstein. About a week in hospital where the cops couldn't approach her, fits with the isolation period.
Yes, the timeline is still as clear as mud.I don't believe the police know what they were discussing during those calls on the Thursday afternoon, only that were a number of calls between the pair. Using GPS they've then been able to work out where they both were when the calls were made. Not 100% sure but expect she was at the caravan park when calls were made. Maybe she was ringing him asking where her daughter was.
And yet she was describing her as friendly, cute, sweet, etc as if she'd seen her recently... I think she picked up that impression from photos on the news.Interview with cousin on abc radio this morn - the cousin said she last saw her when she was 1 year old.
I hope this isn't one of those cases where questions remain unanswered, I'm scratching my head for a possible motive as to why this happened, drug fuelled rage? she saw something she shouldn't have? The calculated movements after she was killed suggests there was some planning, but who knows. It could quite be the case that the mother is genuinely hopeless and wasn't actually directly involved in the crime itself, child negligence should carry a serious penalty regardless, but that's another kettle of fish.
Hope more comes out eventually.
Look, I'd really like nothing more than confirmation that KM is completely innocent of any involvement in her daughter's death, and that my trust in basic human nature and a parent's love and care for their child over-rides anything else.
As Dogs_R-Us and others continue to point out, timelines and other details are still not consistent across media reports and police pressers, and while this doesn't help, trying to at least navigate through these still leaves a fair bit of doubt on KM's actions as a responsible parent. I would be happy to be proven wrong and have all this doubt removed, but until it is, I think many of us continue to speculate on KM's actions and possible involvement, even if minute.
Sadly, I think we will need to await a court session to begin to clarify the inconsistency and missing details.