I just don't get this;
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/odempsey-found-guilty-of-1974-mcculkin-murders-20170526-gwdtfz.html

How on earth can one be charged with murder when there are no bodies. I mean, surely there have been cases where people, who were thought to have been dead, pop up agian in some far away land.

How can this guy really be charged with murder?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body

I am just pleased the police collared the offenders and the jury did its job well. Thanks to all.

Offenders conceal the location of remains to protect themselves and to have lasting power over the family and friends.

I can only wish the offenders long and forgotten lives in prison.

I fervently hope that no fool of a woman comes forward to 'love' either of them, as so often happens. How to explain that?

Or that meddling prisoner 'rights' get involved to throw their weight around and annoy correctional staff and authorities.

A bullet though deserved, is too good for either of them.

This happens a lot...the 2 cases that sprang to my mind immediately were the Samantha Knight case, which I remember very well because of the huge publicity back in the day. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/samantha-knight-30-years-on-little-girls-death-at-the-hands-of-michael-guider-haunted-sydney/news-story/351f609bd8074a448a033954e4dabc2f

The other huge case was Peter Falconis....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Falconio

There have been others, but for some reason those two stand out in my head.

There was this case though..an insurance rort by complete idiots. His wife dobbed him in when she found out he had a new wife in NZ, when he was supposed to be lying low till she could join him after the insurance company paid out. They could have got away with that if he'd behaved himself and no body would have been found.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Man-who-faked-own-death-faces-court/2005/12/22/1135032124801.html

moonshine,

Good catch, It is easy to forget other cases even though the media does return to them on slow news days.

Absolutely i think proper investigation should be care out before a person is black mail with the case of murder because some times we do discover that such case are not genuine.

Butch has a point: there would have to be very strong evidence to convict without a body, surely. But if a crime scene is spattered with blood, if a suspect has it all over his clothes and in his car boot, if people heard screaming and/or shots then silence, if he bragged to a 'friend' what he had done, if he knew details that only the police should know - each case would be different, but all the circumstantial evidence may mount up enough to point conclusively to someone's guilt.

Not to mention the non-appearance over decades of the probably-deceased, no use of credit cards, bank accounts or any hospital records.

Clearly, in such cases, circumstantial evidence would have to be overwhelming, with no loop-holes. I'm still a bit sceptical about Falconio's death though: if the killer had a dog, why weren't any dog prints found in the scrub, or even on the side of the road ? Why no killer's footprints on the side of the road ? Why no pool of blood ? Even the DNA evidence is a bit dodgy. And, less conclusive but still relevant, why ?

I'm still looking forward, though, to the first forensic examination of a suspected Aboriginal massacre site. Surely, there must be many ?

Joe

Stalker/Falconio
http://falconio.weebly.com/john-stalker-investigates.html

You don't always get lots of blood. Murdoch is alleged to have used his .22 revolver to the back of his victim's head. But there or anyhwere else the bullet would have stayed in the body. Small entry and no large exit to drain blood.

Foot prints - As the linked report comments, the ground was hard and stony. Australia is an ancient land and much of it is like that. However an aboriginal tracker saw disturbed rocks.

BTW, I don't know why the media always has 'tracker' when any of my childhood indigenous friends could do the same and taught me (yes, one doesn't have to be black either, just curious and attentive). I guess it is the same as firearms, where all are 'high powered', 'assault' and 'sniper', even Airsoft -although the police do sensationalise and mislead journos, including Airsoft toys too. It's called public relations, apparently and even Police Commissioners do it, thinking especially of Victoria- and definitely so if painted utility black.

The police got the right SOB where Murdoch is concerned. May the cowardly mongrel rot long in gaol until his death.

Hi Leoj,

The problem with explaining why some types of evidence CAN'T be found, (because in the Falconio case, as you say, the ground was hard and stony) it that then there isn't any such evidence, which doesn't help the prosecution's case. To conclude that a crime HAS been committed, you need evidence, not non-evidence.

For example, there are probably stories all over Australia of Aboriginal groups, on their own country, being pushed off cliffs into the sea. Ipso facto, no evidence. But coulda. But no bodies, so all the above caveats about lack of evidence are magnified x-times.

But one problem with evidence-free claims is that they still have to be credible: in one such over-the-cliff story, in East Gippsland, a group of 200 are supposed to have been pushed into the sea. On their own densely-scrubbed country. Two hundred ? Could you get two hundred Aboriginal people together at any one time in those days ? Perhaps not in East Gippsland, notoriously hard country. 200, who didn't know their own country better than whitefellas ? Perhaps there should be some sort of re-enactment, at least the early stages of it all, just to confirm that it was possible.

Cheers,

Joe

rehctub,
Sorry mate, after thirty odd years in the NT,NSW and Fed police most as a detective in
the squads including the murder squad I cannot recall a single instance where a
person has turned up after being presumed dead and a person convicted for that murder.
True enough there have been a number of "returnees" that
have deliberately removed themselves from the social fabric for less than
honest reasons and even declared dead but not having a murderer
convicted for the "without a body" crime.
I am sure o sung wu might have something top add about "circumstantial" convictions.
At the end of the day they are still convictions and the 'perp' is locked up.

Rechtub,

The disappearance of someone is insufficient for a murder charge. There needs to be some evidence of violence against the victim such as signs of struggle, blood etc that coincide with the disappearance. Typically this will follow a coronial hearing in which the victim is declared dead and probably murdered.

A murderer that disposes of a body in a way that no traces or evidence are ever found cannot be convicted.

Some interesting cases for any who want to bat on, but not me,

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/no-body-murder-convictions-prompt-calls-for-shake-up-of-australias-legal-system/news-story/d19968b5c570d5e01a412663cba82215

C U folks.

It would be absolutely horrible to be convicted of a crime like murder if one was innocent, especially a partner you loved. Therefore I think there should be really compelling evidence to convict where there is no body.

But at the same time I think we should have the death penalty for heinous crimes where there is no doubt. Like the cases of Mrs Morse. Ivan Millat and Annita Coby.

By the way I watched the TV series about Ivan Millat a week ago and about Annita Coby last night. Both disturbed me greatly and I had to take a sleeping pill to get to sleep.

I would not be surprised if there is an appeal of the latest no body conviction.