Author Topic: Murder in the outback  (Read 371 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43683
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2020, 03:20:PM »
I was never 100% sure about this at all and still not, one way or the other.

Online Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12590
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2020, 05:27:PM »
She did seem very composed, defensive. One theory here: https://youtu.be/UacBUhqcfLo

Online QCChevalier

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #18 on: July 16, 2020, 03:36:AM »
As with the Bamber case, I suspect they got the right person but the evidence is not quite unimpeachable.  The paradox arises in all law-governed criminal justice systems, but especially where the adversarial mode of trial predominates. It leaves us the core ethical dilemma of what should happen when, intuitively, 'everybody knows he did it' but the evidence isn't quite right.  Really, it's not a dilemma at all.  You have to release him. 

The video linked above - the one with the Australian - is interesting and when I first heard about this case years ago, my gut thinking was along similar lines: that Murdoch and Lees were both covering up some sort of dealings involving drugs.  But on reflection, I'm inclined against the theory.  Murdoch caught up with them out in the middle of nowhere.  It looks to me more like essentially some sort of road rage incident, with Murdoch high on whatever drugs and stimulants he was partaking in.

I doubt Murdoch is some sort of Outback 'serial killer'.  More likely is that he is just a regular troublemaker, was high and angry, had a gun, he took umbrage at them (it could have been anybody) and it all got out of hand.

The legal position is that Peter Falconio is dead, but we don't know for sure that is the case in actuality because the forensic evidence doesn't really support it and the conviction does seem unsafe in the legal sense.  However, I don't find the idea of Falconio faking his own death and disappearing very plausible.  There would have to be a compelling motive.  He had a stable life and an attractive girlfriend. 

He's dead.  The probable killer, Murdoch, will have dumped his body somewhere: probably down a well or mine shaft, or sunk the corpse in a river or similar. 

R.I.P. Peter Falconio.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2020, 03:54:AM by QCChevalier »

Offline Real justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4796
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2020, 08:10:PM »
As with the Bamber case, I suspect they got the right person but the evidence is not quite unimpeachable.  The paradox arises in all law-governed criminal justice systems, but especially where the adversarial mode of trial predominates. It leaves us the core ethical dilemma of what should happen when, intuitively, 'everybody knows he did it' but the evidence isn't quite right.  Really, it's not a dilemma at all.  You have to release him. 

The video linked above - the one with the Australian - is interesting and when I first heard about this case years ago, my gut thinking was along similar lines: that Murdoch and Lees were both covering up some sort of dealings involving drugs.  But on reflection, I'm inclined against the theory.  Murdoch caught up with them out in the middle of nowhere.  It looks to me more like essentially some sort of road rage incident, with Murdoch high on whatever drugs and stimulants he was partaking in.

I doubt Murdoch is some sort of Outback 'serial killer'.  More likely is that he is just a regular troublemaker, was high and angry, had a gun, he took umbrage at them (it could have been anybody) and it all got out of hand.

The legal position is that Peter Falconio is dead, but we don't know for sure that is the case in actuality because the forensic evidence doesn't really support it and the conviction does seem unsafe in the legal sense.  However, I don't find the idea of Falconio faking his own death and disappearing very plausible.  There would have to be a compelling motive.  He had a stable life and an attractive girlfriend. 

He's dead.  The probable killer, Murdoch, will have dumped his body somewhere: probably down a well or mine shaft, or sunk the corpse in a river or similar. 

R.I.P. Peter Falconio.
Very good post QC, it’s about where I’m at.  The only difference being I think he was more than just a troublemaker.  He had a long list of previous, but it all depends how one views this list.  I don’t buy into this new documentary, like all documentaries they Can and have a habit of leaving out whatever they choose.  It was beyond circumstantial, the fact his DNA was on Lee’s t shirt and his DNA was on the black tape puts him there.  He would have had to be very very unlucky for this to be cross contamination?  The Documentary never mentioned the hair slide from Lee, which was found on Bradley’s gun holster.

They keep harping on the fact there wasn’t a body and lack of blood, he had thousands of miles in the outback to dispose of the body, there was blood from Peter, depending on where he was shot and dying instantly would result in lack of crime scene blood.  Not long after the murders, he changed his vehicle from a soft canvas back covering to a hard top covering, changing his appearance and number plates quite frequently.

ANNE BARKER: Hamish, Jonathan Whitaker is a forensic scientist at the labs in Wetherby in England, and he received several swabs of DNA evidence from several items that had been found at the crime scene near Barrow Creek, in particular he was sent a loop from the cable ties that were taken from Joanne Lees' wrists, that the hours after the attack that she alleged happened on the Stuart Highway.


From the DNA expert
In particular, he said he did tests on the layers of black tape that made up the cable ties, and he also received known profiles of the DNA for Joanne Lees, Peter Falconio, and the accused Bradley John Murdoch, and he peeled away a lot of those layers of tape, and on one particular swab that he tested, it wasn't a complete DNA profile, he said, but he was able to calculate the probability that that particular DNA came from Bradley John Murdoch, and he said that it was 100 million times more likely to have been his DNA than any other person in the population selected at random.

Hair elastic convicts Murdoch

The item that ultimately convicted Murdoch was a small, non-descript everyday item, an elastic hair-tie.

The discovery of this item during the investigation confirmed for Ms Gwynne her carefully calculated team selection had paid off.

The officer she had described as the OCD individual was meticulous in trawling through the thousands of Murdoch's belongings confiscated as evidence from his car and trailer.

The officer went through every detail and what she found among those belongings was a hair-tie that was taken from Ms Lees when she struggled to survive at the hands of Murdoch.

"He probably didn't know how significant the hair-tie was and had it wrapped around his holster inside his belongings,"

Offline Real justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4796
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #20 on: July 18, 2020, 08:19:PM »
Very good post QC, it’s about where I’m at.  The only difference being I think he was more than just a troublemaker.  He had a long list of previous, but it all depends how one views this list.  I don’t buy into this new documentary, like all documentaries they Can and have a habit of leaving out whatever they choose.  It was beyond circumstantial, the fact his DNA was on Lee’s t shirt and his DNA was on the black tape puts him there.  He would have had to be very very unlucky for this to be cross contamination?  The Documentary never mentioned the hair slide from Lee, which was found on Bradley’s gun holster.

They keep harping on the fact there wasn’t a body and lack of blood, he had thousands of miles in the outback to dispose of the body, there was blood from Peter, depending on where he was shot and dying instantly would result in lack of crime scene blood.  Not long after the murders, he changed his vehicle from a soft canvas back covering to a hard top covering, changing his appearance and number plates quite frequently.

ANNE BARKER: Hamish, Jonathan Whitaker is a forensic scientist at the labs in Wetherby in England, and he received several swabs of DNA evidence from several items that had been found at the crime scene near Barrow Creek, in particular he was sent a loop from the cable ties that were taken from Joanne Lees' wrists, that the hours after the attack that she alleged happened on the Stuart Highway.


From the DNA expert
In particular, he said he did tests on the layers of black tape that made up the cable ties, and he also received known profiles of the DNA for Joanne Lees, Peter Falconio, and the accused Bradley John Murdoch, and he peeled away a lot of those layers of tape, and on one particular swab that he tested, it wasn't a complete DNA profile, he said, but he was able to calculate the probability that that particular DNA came from Bradley John Murdoch, and he said that it was 100 million times more likely to have been his DNA than any other person in the population selected at random.

Hair elastic convicts Murdoch

The item that ultimately convicted Murdoch was a small, non-descript everyday item, an elastic hair-tie.

The discovery of this item during the investigation confirmed for Ms Gwynne her carefully calculated team selection had paid off.

The officer she had described as the OCD individual was meticulous in trawling through the thousands of Murdoch's belongings confiscated as evidence from his car and trailer.

The officer went through every detail and what she found among those belongings was a hair-tie that was taken from Ms Lees when she struggled to survive at the hands of Murdoch.

"He probably didn't know how significant the hair-tie was and had it wrapped around his holster inside his belongings,"
Sorry I meant to say is it beyond circumstantial, the fact his DNA puts him there?

Online Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12590
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #21 on: July 18, 2020, 08:57:PM »
Sorry I meant to say is it beyond circumstantial, the fact his DNA puts him there?
I think the Channel 4 documentary raised questions such as why there was so little DNA recovered, why Joanne Lees lied about not visiting the café with Peter, her movements during the incident itself when she escaped and her behaviour with the mass media. I'm not saying Bradley Murdoch was innocent, but there may have been more to the story than came out.  https://youtu.be/28eb8c6FYEM
« Last Edit: July 18, 2020, 09:43:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline Real justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4796
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #22 on: July 18, 2020, 10:15:PM »
I think the Channel 4 documentary raised questions such as why there was so little DNA recovered, why Joanne Lees lied about not visiting the café with Peter, her movements during the incident itself when she escaped and her behaviour with the mass media. I'm not saying Bradley Murdoch was innocent, but there may have been more to the story than came out.  https://youtu.be/28eb8c6FYEM
I think Steve, if you watch the programme, the two truck drivers own up to being part responsible for the lack of DNA, one tells the other to take her to the wash room ect to clean up.  I don’t blame her for the way she reacted with the media, she knew they would be onto the fact she had cheated on Peter, I think she tried to distance herself from them?  Because she had been having an affair it probably clouded her thoughts while  waiting for it to come out in the open Steve?  One thing is for sure, even when he’s up for Parole, if he doesn’t tell where the body is, he isn’t coming out, so it could get really interesting in a few years time if he’s still alive.

Offline Real justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4796
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #23 on: July 18, 2020, 10:29:PM »
I think Steve, if you watch the programme, the two truck drivers own up to being part responsible for the lack of DNA, one tells the other to take her to the wash room ect to clean up.  I don’t blame her for the way she reacted with the media, she knew they would be onto the fact she had cheated on Peter, I think she tried to distance herself from them?  Because she had been having an affair it probably clouded her thoughts while  waiting for it to come out in the open Steve?  One thing is for sure, even when he’s up for Parole, if he doesn’t tell where the body is, he isn’t coming out, so it could get really interesting in a few years time if he’s still alive.
Don't forget Steve, there was a pool of blood and it was Peter’s blood, how can anyone suggest because there wasn’t more blood it’s lack of evidence?  We don’t know how quick he died or where on the body he was shot, if he died instantly it’s obvious there would be less blood.

Online Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12590
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #24 on: July 18, 2020, 10:30:PM »
I think Steve, if you watch the programme, the two truck drivers own up to being part responsible for the lack of DNA, one tells the other to take her to the wash room ect to clean up.  I don’t blame her for the way she reacted with the media, she knew they would be onto the fact she had cheated on Peter, I think she tried to distance herself from them?  Because she had been having an affair it probably clouded her thoughts while  waiting for it to come out in the open Steve?  One thing is for sure, even when he’s up for Parole, if he doesn’t tell where the body is, he isn’t coming out, so it could get really interesting in a few years time if he’s still alive.
Reading some of the YouTube posts here I get the feeling that more disbelieve her story than believe..https://youtu.be/pvHAfdkjhoU

Online Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12590
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #25 on: July 18, 2020, 10:32:PM »
Don't forget Steve, there was a pool of blood and it was Peter’s blood, how can anyone suggest because there wasn’t more blood it’s lack of evidence?  We don’t know how quick he died or where on the body he was shot, if he died instantly it’s obvious there would be less blood.
I'm not sure what to believe. It does all depend on the low copy number DNA and Joanne Lees' story herself. Maybe you're right in that she was self-defensive because she felt guilty about cheating on a now dead man and possibly the stigma of smoking a joint.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2020, 10:33:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline Real justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4796
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #26 on: July 18, 2020, 10:39:PM »
Reading some of the YouTube posts here I get the feeling that more disbelieve her story than believe..https://youtu.be/pvHAfdkjhoU
I have to agree, she didn’t come across well and she didn’t do herself any favours, she’s always been a target for the press and always will be, mainly because of her silence with them.  I get the feeling she knew they would be all over her once her affair came out, not only the press but the public as well.  Aussies didn’t take too kind to the fact it would damage tourism for the Country.  Have to admire the police they did stick with it and her and got him in the end?  Mainly thanks to this woman, a powerful and brave cop.

To begin the investigation, Ms Gwynne and her team returned to the scene.

She got her team to drop her off at the site where Falconio's girlfriend Joanne Lees hid — a salt bush in the middle of nowhere outside Alice Springs.

Ms Gwynne sat there behind that salt bush as her team drove away and left her alone. She says she has never been more terrified or vulnerable in her life.

"I wanted to cry. It was the most scary feeling. I could hear my own heartbeat — and I can actually ring someone to pick me up, she couldn't do that," she said.

"That's when it felt really real for me. I understood what this woman had been through and it was scary."

Offline Real justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4796
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #27 on: July 18, 2020, 10:45:PM »
I'm not sure what to believe. It does all depend on the low copy number DNA and Joanne Lees' story herself. Maybe you're right in that she was self-defensive because she felt guilty about cheating on a now dead man and possibly the stigma of smoking a joint.
Looks like there was DNA on the gearstick as well Steve?  This was after they had got DNA from him.

We now know who touched her on her shirt, we now know who touched the gear stick in the Kombi and we now know who made the manacles," Ms Gwynne said.

Online Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12590
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #28 on: July 19, 2020, 04:00:PM »
Looks like there was DNA on the gearstick as well Steve?  This was after they had got DNA from him.

We now know who touched her on her shirt, we now know who touched the gear stick in the Kombi and we now know who made the manacles," Ms Gwynne said.
But if you watch the Channel 4 documentary it alleges this DNA could have come from many people, that's to say it's not exclusive to Murdoch.

I think he's guilty, but there's more to this story than has been revealed thus far.

Offline Real justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4796
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Murder in the outback
« Reply #29 on: July 19, 2020, 05:19:PM »
But if you watch the Channel 4 documentary it alleges this DNA could have come from many people, that's to say it's not exclusive to Murdoch.

I think he's guilty, but there's more to this story than has been revealed thus far.
The DNA from Lee’s T shirt was a match 150 trillions to one, the gear stick was a match to Bradley Murdoch, the DNA from the strap had, Lee’s DNA on and Dr Peter Thatcher (Forensic) and also Bradley’s DNA.  So although the blood match on Lee’s t’ Shirt didn’t put Murdoch at the crime scene it puts him in contact at some point with her, like the Documentary said, could have been at the Gas station.  The DNA on the gear stick puts him at the crime scene.

Although the DNA from the strap was a Low Copy number DNA it still gave a match it being Bradley Murdoch of 100 million to one.  Now, when you think that the population of Australia at the time of 20 million its not bad odds Steve?  Without DNA he would have got off.