Jump to content

The Sounds Murders back in the News

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sadly for Scott the road to any form of justice has long been paved with layer after layer of falsehoods and will forever stretch its arc of prejudice and harm well over the horizon of his time.

There is one and only one reason why Watson is not being released. Purely and simply, he will not admit remorse, because he will not admit guilt. I think that tells you a lot about the guys character.

Can't get parole if he doesn't admit to doing it. kind of a problem if he didn't do it. I've got no opinion on if he did or didn't. But this admitting guilt before parole thing is a bit of a

Posted Images


Wot fish said catch 22.

Very very suspect that they took two goes at finding 2x blond hairs at 150 & 250mm apeice.

Would be interesting to follow the paper trail, email, ph calls around the whole tiger blanket scenario.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Priscilla II said:

That's a very interesting read, Priscilla.

While you feel for Gerald Hope, the guy is just so naive after all these years, both in the way the Police framed the whole bunch of crap, and also the maritime side of things.

For example:

"Like the scrub marks on the hull: he could explain how he’d genuinely cleaned his hull, but Hope could always claim this was covering up for where the bodies had rubbed weed off the hull"

Jaysus christ, he actually believes the bodies could have floated up and scraped the side of the Blade's hull, when any sailor knows that's complete bullsh^t and that to scrape a hull you need physical force with a scraper or some similar instrument to remove fouling.....if he honestly thinks floating bodies rubbing against a steel hull removed weed fouling, then this guy, Gerald Hope, is nuts, sorry.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found guilty on 2 of Olivia's hairs found on his vessel?? Now if the police at the time tested every person/vessel who was there and had made contact with Ben/Olivia how many would possibly hair some of there hair on clothing??

My cat has never been in the truck yet I have cat hair purely from brushing against the cat, transmission by association?



Link to post
Share on other sites

I  remain of the opinion that whether or not he did it he should never have been convicted on the evidence presented at the trial. Too many speculative opinions ,changed evidence  and police shenanigans. Read the transcript and it doesn't make enough to convince you beyond reasonable doubt. I read about Guy Wallace in the media the other day saying he was pleased Watson was there because Wallace reckoned he was next on the list for a conviction. Watson is reported to sometimes be sullen and angry in gaol and that's why he's not ready for parole after 22 years. Just say he didn't do it and put yourself in his place . You'd be sullen and angry too ?. IMO there's too much doubt. He's done 22 years, parole him now....no new (expensive) trial and no payout if a new trial finds him not guilty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the grounds for appeal hinge on the hairs.

Advances in testing point to their origin being control samples from direct relatives and not Olivias.

Jail house snitch evidence used to nail home convictions like Scott Watsons mirror the David Tamihere case which now also heads to the Appeal Court.

Now is the time to remove such perilously suspect evidence from ever being used in a court of law.



Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one and only one reason why Watson is not being released. Purely and simply, he will not admit remorse, because he will not admit guilt. I think that tells you a lot about the guys character. Choosing to remain somewhere you don't want to be purely because you want to remain honest with yourself and everyone else. That's real integrity in my book. He is one of only a few that have basically a true life sentence where one can remain locked up for ever, with the only chance of Parole being subject to acknowledging one's guilt.
      Our legal system is no different to many other Countries around the World. We can't call it "Broken", but we sure can say it needs to be changed. Once a jury convicts a person based n the evidence presented, that evidence can no longer be re questioned. No matter how silly the evidence is. Only new evidence can ever be heard. In this case, the new evidence is in relation to the handling of the Blanket and if it is possible the Hairs could have been introduced to the Blanket accidentally during the Lab tests. Not that the hair was unlikely to be Olivia's, which has already been considered by the Jury and cannot be revisited.
Personally I don't like the way our legal system works. But it is what we have and we have to live with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...