The death of any young person is a tragedy and we can only empathise with those that experience the loss. The murder of a young woman on her twenty-second birthday must be doubly so. Such was the fate of Grace Millane from England on holiday in Aukland, New Zealand at the hands of a twenty-seven year old man who she had met for the first time on a blind date on the first of December, 2018.
On the twenty second of November 2019, after a three week trial, the un-named man was found guilty of murder by strangulation and of burying her body inside a suitcase in a shallow grave. For some reason his sentencing was deferred to the end of February, 2020. The BBC described it as "perhaps the most highly publicised murder case in New Zealand's history." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-50515326
The Guardian reported that after the trial, Grace's father David Millane, made the following statement:
"Speaking outside the court, David Millane said the verdict would be welcomed by his family and his daughter’s friends, but it “will not reduce the pain and suffering we have had to endure over the past year”. He said: “Grace was taken from us in the most brutal fashion. Our lives have been ripped apart. This will be with us for the rest of our lives. Grace was a beautiful, talented, loving daughter.“Grace was our sunshine. She did not deserve to be murdered in such a barbaric way in her OE [overseas experience] year.”He thanked the police, prosecution and New Zealand people for their kindness.“We must return home and try to pick up the pieces of our lives, day to day, without our lovely Grace.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/22/grace-millane-murder-trial-guilty-new-zealand-man-british-backpacker
Without detracting anything from the tragedy, the police investigation or legal process, there are aspects of the case that are as puzzling as they are intriguing, not least why, even when found guilty, by court order, the culprit's identity was kept secret. The anonymity surrounding the defendant, was first said to protect the fairness of the trial, and after the guilty verdict, "in part because of the level of interest in the case". Others who gave evidence were also afforded total anonymity and all video used to support the prosecution was obscured adding additional intrigue.
For someone sensitised to the way in which high profile cases of terrorism and violence are created for psychological and political effect, any such case raises doubts and questions that deserve to be posed. This article, with due respect will pose them. It will be for others to answer them.
Part of the reason why this murder was given international attention was the graphic sexual content that may appeal to the salacious minded and its connection to social dating sites - in this case Tinder. We cannot ignore the fact that globally, governments are attempting to control the Internet and providers themselves are exercising increasing censorship and other methods. Cases such as this may influence public opinion in the desired direction, just as incidents of terrorism facilitate gun control and increased monitoring. Note the Christchurch Mosque shooting also took place on the 15th March, 2019 ("Beware the Ides of March")
My first reasonable question relates to how the young woman came to be travelling alone around the world and why she was in New Zealand, alone and with no contacts for only two weeks. No information has been provided as to her time in South America, how or why she travelled to New Zealand, or what she did in the two weeks prior to her fateful meeting. If she used Tinder in this instance, information must have been available as to whether she had used it before.
The fact that she met a complete stranger and within a few hours was prepared to go back to his room, not knowing anything about him for what was alleged to be "rough sex" is hard to reconcile with a sensible, intelligent university undergraduate. Nor are any clues given in the available videos of a sexually provocative or adventurous women, insofar as images can provide such. She may indeed have wished to celebrate her birthday, but going to bed with a man on first date must still hold some currency.
They meet for the first time in a public concourse and greet with a big hug. In interview the accused says he did so for his own safety and security, in case the person who turns up is someone quite different and inferior. Some might think this somewhat ironic.
They immediately go for a meal of some sort and a snippet of video as they are shown in and as he settles the bill, are provided but little else. Then it is claimed they attend some sort of night club or pub, for which brief video support is provided. The place is only very dimly lit but even here efforts have been taken obscure any identifiable features of the man. Why?
Whilst here prosecutors make much of the fact that she leaves briefly enabling him to check in her handbag. No allegation of theft has been made so why did he do it? Was it just a theatrical addition to the story line? However the real question it poses is why she would have left her handbag there at all. Have you ever known a woman go to the Ladies or bar without it, or at least coming back for it, if it was forgotten?
Then we have video of them entering the hotel - ironically named "City Life" at about 9.35 pm, quite early for a first date. There is no video evidence of anything more than platonic body contact or of obvious alcoholic behaviour although at the trial this was used as an excuse. Apparently the accused lived there. No information has been given as to how long was his stay, how he afforded it and such like. Nor how the hotel was run. This is significant as most hotels require persons to be signed in and provide domestic assistance to make beds and such like. If this were the case Grace Millane's body would undoubtedly been discovered. Did no staff question the arrival but not her departure?
His story about what happened makes little sense. He claims they had 'rough sex' yet as far as I can see no DNA evidence was produced. Semen remnants appear to be completely lacking. Conversely it is claimed there were large patches of blood staining, for which photographs are circulated, but the pathologist only refers to a bruised neck with an absence of any blood causing injuries. The accused backs this up with an assertion there were no other injuries. So we must ask where the blood originated.
Similarly the white bedding appears quite clean and normal although we do not know when that image was produced. In it we see another identical suitcase which raises questions. When he leaves allegedly with a body in one, this second case is on top plus another hand hold. The forensics on the two cases seems to be absent.
He claims he wakes up in the morning after wonderful sex in the bed but Grace naked on the floor. He claims she wanted rough sex but cannot remember how she got there. At some point he goes to sleep in the shower. Next morning before 8.30 am he is at the shopping mall buying the second case. This is time recorded on video as 8.26. Now we have a MAJOR problem, because the same morning, hotel video shows him leaving the lift with the new suitcase at 8:14. In other words the video suggests he arrives with the case 12 minutes before he purchases it over the counter. THIS IS CLEARLY IMPOSSIBLE but has not been identified or explained.
Note in video below arriving hotel with case at 08:14. But another video shows him buying it 08:26. Thus the claim is made he arrived back at the hotel with it BEFORE he had purchased it!!!! A slight problem with the sequencing there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vBunHeWNIE
There are obviously questions of how he managed to get a body, into such a confined space, let alone one still affected by Rigor Mortis. No suggestion was made of dismemberment. Strangely at trial the policemen referred to "remains" in the suitcase, not a body. Given that less than seven days had elapsed and evidence of strangulation was still visible, the corpse must have been intact and in a good state of preservation.
Finally here the recorded interview with the accused that included a charge of murder shows no sign of a solicitor or lawyer present yet this is not explained. It seems strange the interview was left to a detective sergeant in such a high profile case. Someone else is in the room but who that is is not explained. The detective sergeant's questions and manner seem to suggest a foregone conclusion. Why the continuous note taking when it was being video recorded.
The style is stilted and (no offence intended) very amateurish. Only one image appears be presented yet both must be aware CCTV cameras are everywhere. The speed with which the accused is identified and charged, less than seven days, is immediately somewhat suspicious. Sexually motivated killers, are surely more careful in their action and the police far less efficient. Cite the 'Yorkshire Ripper' and many other cases.
These are just a few of the questions that appear to me that cause an element of doubt in the official narrative that may point to more deep state meddling for dubious motives.
Note man's shiny leather fashion shoes @ 0:08 and later in lift 0:29
The section in the night club @ 0:12 has been severely edited so that it no long shows Grace leaving the table and in particular her light coloured slacks shown previously.
Time line:
Daily Mail video HERE: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7678347/Jury-Grace-Millane-murder-trial-pictures-suitcase-body-Auckland-New-Zealand.html
8:07 2.12.2018 HE IS SHOWN ENTERING THE STORE.
8:14 am 2.12.2018 He is seen at the hotel getting in and out of the lift with the suitcase impossibly 12 minutes BEFORE he is shown to be purchasing it AT....
8.26 am 2.12.2018 Accused buys case over counter of store..
8:32 am 2.12.2018 Seen getting out of lift without case and leaving hotel
Next an un-date/time stamped video in shop to purchase cleaning materials
9:40 am 2.12.2019 Shown entering car hire premises. His trainer bottoms appear much lighter with three distinctive dark stripes. It is not clear whether these are the same as in earlier shots.
11:02 am 2.12.2018 He re enters hotel entrance.
Next he appears in bar (untimed) but wearing different trousers (jeans) and shoes (now leather fashion shoes)
7:44 pm 2.12.2018 Shown returning to hotel in hired red car then in lift returning to room. It appears he has been away from his room for nearly nine hours with dead Ms Millane inside. Clearly no cleaning staff have entered or they would have discovered the body! However he must have returned at some stage, for he is now back in the striped trainer bottoms and trainer shoes!
9:31 pm (21:31) He is shown entering lift with suitcase on trolley. This it is claimed contains the body of Ms Millane. Yet it is quite clear from the way he adjusts it , it consists of no weight at all and certainly DOES NOT contain a body. However there is another similar sized case under it which may plus another carry hold all. It is hard to conceive how Ms Millane could be fitted into such a small space, leaving aside the problems associated with rigor mortis.
6:30 am 3.12.2018 Car parked in empty car park. Enters store to purchase shovel.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.