Jeremy Bamber Forum

OTHER HIGH PROFILE CASES => Other high profile cases => Topic started by: Jan on June 09, 2020, 07:53:PM

Title: Murder in the outback
Post by: Jan on June 09, 2020, 07:53:PM
Anyone watch this on channel 4 ?

Some interesting comments on DNA evidence .
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk on June 09, 2020, 08:52:PM
Anyone watch this on channel 4 ?

Some interesting comments on DNA evidence .
https://youtu.be/fEMz1ACXF8g
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Jan on June 09, 2020, 09:26:PM
And are you saying the other film is more informative?
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk on June 10, 2020, 08:24:PM
And are you saying the other film is more informative?
I didn't see the Channel 4 programme.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: JackieD on June 10, 2020, 09:54:PM
And are you saying the other film is more informative?

I am gripped especially tonight the experiment on the transfer of DNA and why there was so little DNA evidence
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: nugnug on June 10, 2020, 10:04:PM
shouldent this be in the other cases section..
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: JackieD on June 11, 2020, 09:08:AM
shouldent this be in the other cases section..
Your right Nugs
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: lookout on June 11, 2020, 11:26:AM
A brilliant documentary which definitely gave food for thought with DNA testing. Are we so behind in the UK ?
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: lookout on June 11, 2020, 11:30:AM
Joanne was definitely out of the JM mould/ mold when questioned I thought.
The verdict in this one is pretty debateable too.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 on June 17, 2020, 12:55:PM
Joanne was definitely out of the JM mould/ mold when questioned I thought.
The verdict in this one is pretty debateable too.
I thought that as well Lookout, but I think her mind was all over the place, she had been having an affair and even had contact with her lover on the day by phone, she was worried this would put her in the frame.   I think with the DNA, if you watch it again one of the two truck drivers who picked her up made the mistake of telling her to wash herself up in the rest room, to which she did, this probably destroyed most of the DNA, they also handled the tape etc that was used to tie her up, again this would have had an effect on the DNA evidence in these items?  So the DNA, I think on her shoulder was the only Perfect match, something in the billions to one?   But the biggest thing they never showed or talked about, was, the Mary Jane hair slide found on his gun holster that belonged to Lee’s when they searched his house.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 on June 17, 2020, 01:00:PM
The forensic expert advised that the DNA from Lees’s T-shirt was 150 quadrillion times more likely to have come from Murdoch than someone else.

Then a detective – the one Gwynne had chosen for her acute attention to detail and who had sifted through thousands of Murdoch’s belongings – discovered a small, round, Mary Jane hair tie.
“It was the hair tie that was taken from Joanne Lees when she struggled to survive and keep her life. [Murdoch] had it wrapped around his shoulder holster, inside his belongings. I think it was a trophy but no one will ever know.”
Months later, when the hair tie was presented as evidence in the trial, it clearly made an impression on Murdoch.
“He recoiled and he wouldn’t touch it,” recalls Gwynne. “You could see that he knew that was it. That was the nail in his coffin.”
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Roch on June 17, 2020, 01:21:PM
Never felt comfortable with her purely as a victim. However, I doubt she could have conned Aussie police. Although, they would have been under pressure due to tourism implications etc.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 on June 17, 2020, 02:16:PM
Never felt comfortable with her purely as a victim. However, I doubt she could have conned Aussie police. Although, they would have been under pressure due to tourism implications etc.
Yes it was a strange case Roch.  I think he will be 74 when he’s allegible for parole, but Aussie’s have a clause that if he doesn’t reveal where the body is, he doesn’t come out?
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Roch on June 17, 2020, 02:22:PM
Yes it was a strange case Roch.  I think he will be 74 when he’s allegible for parole, but Aussie’s have a clause that if he doesn’t reveal where the body is, he doesn’t come out?

I've recorded RJ, it so may watch it.  Been watching a fictional Aussie crime series called Mystery Road.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 on June 17, 2020, 02:29:PM
I've recorded RJ, it so may watch it.  Been watching a fictional Aussie crime series called Mystery Road.
I might watch that one Roch.  Another good Aussie one, I listened to on a podcast, Disappearance of Lynette Dawson, I think they still trying to get her husband for it? It’s called The Teachers Pet .
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk on July 10, 2020, 09:24:PM
This has put the cat among the pigeons: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8510435/Joanne-Lees-stepfather-says-Bradley-John-Murdoch-INNOCENT-outback-slaying-Peter-Falconio.html

The Channel 4 documentary: https://www.channel4.com/programmes/murder-in-the-outback/episode-guide/
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2020, 03:20:PM
I was never 100% sure about this at all and still not, one way or the other.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk on July 11, 2020, 05:27:PM
She did seem very composed, defensive. One theory here: https://youtu.be/UacBUhqcfLo
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest29835 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.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 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,"
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 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?
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk 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
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 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.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 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.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk 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
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk 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.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 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."
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 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.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk 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.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 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.
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: Steve_uk on July 19, 2020, 06:19:PM
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.
Was it the case that these makeshift manacles were shown to Murdoch in the interrogation room?
Title: Re: Murder in the outback
Post by: guest7363 on July 19, 2020, 08:27:PM
Was it the case that these makeshift manacles were shown to Murdoch in the interrogation room?
I think the main point the defence made about the manicles, was the fact they had been stored in the same freezer as another known profile of DNA from Bradley, it was said in court Murdoch never touched the manicles when the police took them in a paper bag while interviewing him?  They were kept in this bag and not shown to him either?  Don’t know how true though Steve?  It seems, Murdoch has exhausted all avenues of appeal. The only possible way to clear his name is through a Petition of Mercy, or by the police reopening the investigation and finding fresh evidence.  Denise Hurley, who was the NT Police Media liason officer during the case, said there was no chance the case would ever be reopened. There's no substantial evidence in order to do that,' she said.

So that’s interesting, you only get ex number of appeals in Australia.

I also take this view, dealing with the press is very hard, you can take different routes and be judged guilty by them, you can give them everything and they are all over you like a rash until they find something on you and they then turn, if you don’t cooperate with them and be hard your judged as Cold.  Look how they hounded and judged poor Christopher Jefferies.

Ms Hurley said because Ms Lees had tried to be strong in front of the media, and had not cried, that she had been unfairly judged like Lindy Chamberlain before her as being cold, distant and possibly guilty. she also said it was unfair of the documentary to use the unsympathetic snippet of footage of Joanne Lees' last interview when she was tired, had been interviewed many times and was about to leave the country.