Friday, June 22, 2012

Ewen MacDonald: the arson - what was he thinking?

A few points to ponder on the arson and vandalism.

The Arson: MacDonald's explanation to the police and his wife was that it was a joke. It certainly wasn't a joke in way, shape, or form. At least one of those trailers was a purpose hydraulic assisted unit. I saw a 2nd hand one go at auction recently for just under $300,000. The house was obviously been moved for sale, otherwise it wouldn't have been on the house-movers trailer. I don't know who owned it but possibly it was the property of the house movers or someone else who had brought it. All together replacement costs of 2 trailers and a removable house could have been approaching between 6 to 8 hundred thousand, only idiots would start a fire like that and not expect to destroy the trailers. Saying that it was a joke isn't an acceptable explanation and it's pretty obvious MacDonald will be looking at some fairly substantial prison time for that offence which he has admitted. There has been evidence of 'how he was' after the 3 events, the arson, vandalism and murder - cool on the first two distressed on the third. The cool on the first two shows some unusual characteristics to the man, going on with those you have acted against as though nothing has happened. Yet Anna said that the vandalism resulted in a change in Ewen's attitude toward Kylee in that it improved, perhaps that was guilt - there can be little other reason for that because he wasn't considered to be involved at that point in 2008.

The graffiti, vandalism and letters: Kylee didn't read those letters. They exist only as a report which surfaced after Ewen's arrest. We don't know what happened to them but they didn't reach their intended target, Greg King has challenged whether they existed. Whether they existed or not, Kylee never read them. In his interviews with the police MacDonald was adamant that the relationship between Kylee and her husband was good. One could have expected that if MacDonald was the author of those letters, or knew, or was told about the contents, he might have seen that it was an opportunity to 'steer' the hunt away from himself, as he has been accused with the missing puppies. As I understand it the graffiti didn't seek to impart a difficulty in Scott's and Kylee's marriage whereas the letters did. I could see the letters as counter productive to MacDonald's 'cause' by virtue of the reason they may have been likely to cause a difficulty in the marriage possibly driving Kylee away but leaving Scott on the farm. The 'letters' remain a mystery, one possibly that clearly doesn't support 'driving' the couple away, but rather unsettling the marriage - though of course it could be argued that 'slapper' and 'whore' - the graffiti of MacDonald and Boe could be seen as a 'similar' if less direct design toward the same purpose.

The vandalism was a direct act against the couple orchestrated by MacDonald a year earlier than the murder. A correspondent has written that I'm attempting to broaden that distance, perhaps I'm am unwittingly but a year remains a year - a long time in the dynamics of a family relationship and 'competition' between 2 men. MacDonald has caused himself a lot of problems because of those acts and unless we hear from him before the end on the trial his explanation remains that which he gave in his interview and to his wife. The person perhaps capable of shedding some more light on the subject isn't going to give evidence at the trial, and has also been ruled out as a suspect in the murder. So again we have a half a dozen of one six of another situation. Boe was a co-offender in a serious arson, trusted to the point that MacDonald at first covered for him (and himself of course) when questioned by police in the video - but he's been cleared of the murder. So wasn't involved despite being MacDonald's being apparent willing backup in a crime that carries 14 years in prison.

Then back to the less speculative evidence. Today MacDonald's mother confirmed that MacDonald was distressed and crying when he rang her on the morning of the murder, saying that Scott had his throat cut but couldn't be sure. She also said that she hadn't seen the dive boots when she'd been on the farm for several weeks in 2010. While Anna MacDonald was sure they'd been thrown out in 2008, 2 years before the murder. Things that should be working for the Crown don't seem to be unless they're speculative or noted as 'what the Crown says' rather than what a witness or evidence says. MacDonald's father, a gun dealer, was absolutely certain that MacDonald hadn't accessed a shotgun, joining MacDonald's father-in-law with the same certainty that his shotgun had been accessed. Then we go to the 'mystery' man Boe, not Riddick but Callum, the mission accomplice, the co-offender. No information from him that he'd seen his mate with a shotgun that might have been of easy access, the very thing the police needed. Somehow I think if the murder was going to 'break' it might be expected to have done so around Callum Boe. In the absence of that we wait.

Again looking at Callum Boe's and Ewen's  offending, nasty and foolish, but remote from targeting anyone with violence, unlike the killer that morning whoever he or she was.

4 comments:

  1. Watching the detectivesJune 22, 2012 at 8:10 PM

    The house was sold for $7,000 or $8,000 to the new owners and was being shifted by Brittons. They (Ewen and Callum Boe)can't have been drunk as they took off immediately to drive up north. As for Ewen saying it was a joke, after watching the interview I don't think that's what he meant; I think he meant it was just being idiotic, that there was no real reason other than succumbing to temptation to do something stupid.

    The "letters" - well, we don't know if they even existed. While Scott may have hidden them from his wife, it seems unlikely that he wouldn't have talked to someone else in the family. Perhaps someone simple had misinterpreted normal friendliness from her as flirtation?

    But the vandalism is nasty and foolish, as you say. It can't be explained away as a silly prank, nor as a potential insurance scam (like the fire could). And explains fully why the police thought/think Ewen was the murderer. I would probably think so myself. But thinking he is is not proving he is. Spelling out the reason for thinking he is, as they have done is well and good, but it is NOT evidence that he committed the murder, just evidence for thinking that he was a prime suspect.

    And so far there is NO evidence that ties him to the murder. The bootprints - which could have been anyone's who owned the boots - *may* have been left by a pair of boots which Ewen *may* have owned; and they were *probably* left by the murderer. Anna thinks she threw one of them out, Ewen's mother says they were definitely not about when she was sitting the children before the murderer - and she was looking for them specifically.

    Meanwhile there is the sack that was 'unusual' seen in the driveway the morning of the murders. There was a Winfield Gold cigarette butt/cigarette packet (or possibly both depending on which account you read) found by the scene, after a burglary the night before had included theft of those and an urn of a child's ashes. There had been a lot of burglaries in which guns had been stolen.

    So on the one hand there is a suspect who had nothing to gain (Ewen: the farm ownership and shareholding had been made explicit), and dislike and rivalry seems an insufficient motive for murder when it required such careful planning and wasn't spur of the moment. On the other hand there is an unknown person who left cigarette butts, and two (at least) unknown people driving cars including a 'boy racer', which have never been traced.

    There are also three shots. Wadding was found, and pellets, so it's known that Scott was killed by a shotgun. But three shots, in quick succession? Either very quick reloading, or more than one gun.

    A surprising amount can be told from the available evidence, if properly analysed. A cigarette butt can give DNA. Wadding can give a lot of information about the ammunition and the gun used. Footprints can give information about height, weight and gait of the person leaving them, especially when there were so many of them - a trail to the dog shed.

    Yet again this appears to be a case where the Police have decided who did it, and have built a case rather than finding out who did it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. One wonders about the context of the relationship between Ewen and Callum Boe...?

    ReplyDelete
  3. What does one wonder? Callum Boe was a young kid with no parents that Ewen took under his wing. It seems he looked up to Ewen and was happy to be his sidekick.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Under his wing?? Is that a euphenism for their 'missions'??

    ReplyDelete