Speaker 1: So the person who she went to meet we feel
Speaker 1: either killed her or had something to do with her death.
Speaker 2: It would have had to be in the hundreds of
Speaker 2: thousands of dollars for this to be really exposed. No,
Speaker 2: I don't believe there's two people involved, and it's hard
Speaker 2: to hide this forever twenty odd years now.
Speaker 3: Welcome to the fourth update episode of Dear Rochelle. You're
Speaker 3: behind the scenes access to this live podcast investigation series.
Speaker 4: I'm your host, Ashley Hanson.
Speaker 3: This bonus episode is your chance to ask the questions.
Speaker 3: Over the past week, We've been flooded with messages from followers,
Speaker 3: so let's not waste any time. I'm joined by retired
Speaker 3: New South Wales detective and cold case expert Damien Luhn,
Speaker 3: who's been volunteering his time since the beginning of last
Speaker 3: year to reinvestigate Rochelle's case with me. He joins me
Speaker 3: along with Rochelle's sister Christy to respond to your questions.
Speaker 3: Let's begin, Tanyell says, one thing I thought about today
Speaker 3: was Christie's comments on Rochelle's car when it was found.
Speaker 3: She mentioned about the steering wheel lock. Had they taken
Speaker 3: into consideration why it was placed the way.
Speaker 1: It was, Yeah, they did. That was a big part
Speaker 1: of my evidence. I knew that she didn't put there,
Speaker 1: and I think that whoever put it there either killed
Speaker 1: her or had something to do with her death. And
Speaker 1: I don't think they realized that she had a specific
Speaker 1: way that she put it on, because it was not
Speaker 1: put on the way that Rachelle puts it on. So
Speaker 1: that's how I knew that she didn't park it there.
Speaker 1: So that was brought up in coroner's court, and the
Speaker 1: police do know about that, and yeah, I think that
Speaker 1: they agreed that she wasn't the one that parked it there.
Speaker 3: So this leads me into the next question is why
Speaker 3: are we so confident that Rochelle knew her killer.
Speaker 2: She was the type of girl that didn't take any risk.
Speaker 2: She was a bit carefree, but she wasn't silly, and
Speaker 2: she was going to meet somebody there at the Bargo Pub. Now,
Speaker 2: had it raised any concerns with her, she would have
Speaker 2: told somebody. And I'm just believe that she would have
Speaker 2: known her killer.
Speaker 1: So the person who she went to meet we feel
Speaker 1: either killed her or had something to do with her death,
Speaker 1: or knows what happened to her. Because yes, she didn't
Speaker 1: actually meet up with anybody that she knew after work,
Speaker 1: and we didn't have anyone come forward saying that Rochelle
Speaker 1: never arrived.
Speaker 4: Well with the steering will lock.
Speaker 3: I believe that that shows that whoever went to the
Speaker 3: attempts of putting the steering will lock back on probably
Speaker 3: knew that she would do that, so they were trying
Speaker 3: to imitate her behavior and they didn't get it quite right.
Speaker 4: Would that play into it as well.
Speaker 2: I'll certainly be, because it would have been well known
Speaker 2: in her business and her amongst her friends that she
Speaker 2: always secured a car with a club lockdown. If that
Speaker 2: was not on in the car when it was recovered,
Speaker 2: it would have been a dead giveaway very quickly that
Speaker 2: someone else had been in that motor vehicle. But unfortunately
Speaker 2: the for the killer has put that club lock on,
Speaker 2: has put it on the wrong way.
Speaker 3: Do you think whoever was responsible knew that Rachelle would
Speaker 3: be home alone that evening?
Speaker 1: Potentially she like you know, her life was no secret.
Speaker 1: She talked constantly. She could talk underwater with a mouthful
Speaker 1: of marbles, and she talked to anybody and nothing was
Speaker 1: you know, she was a naive in the fact that
Speaker 1: she would she trusted people that she knew, She wouldn't
Speaker 1: have thought anything of telling someone that she was home alone.
Speaker 3: Julian has sent in a question. Was the car ever
Speaker 3: forensically tested?
Speaker 2: Yes it was. It was to a secure holding ard
Speaker 2: after Rapel's body had been located, and then two days
Speaker 2: later the commodore was founded in the recar park of
Speaker 2: the Barga Hotel and that was toad and to a
Speaker 2: secure holding art where it was forensicanly examined.
Speaker 3: From your understanding, was the face plate to Rachelle's stereo
Speaker 3: ever found?
Speaker 2: I believe it was in her handbag when that was
Speaker 2: located a number of days afterwards. And look, this tells
Speaker 2: us is a very important issue that Rachelle had intended
Speaker 2: to leave that vehicle there. So it was always her
Speaker 2: routine that went, she to park a car and she
Speaker 2: would take the face place out, so you know the
Speaker 2: stereo couldn't be stolen. Basically, he led to that face
Speaker 2: plate and she would then secure a car with a
Speaker 2: club lock. So it tells me that she was expected
Speaker 2: to be away from that vehicle for some considerable time
Speaker 2: until she returned home.
Speaker 3: Is it also then fair to surmise that she wasn't
Speaker 3: intercepted at her home because she had her handbag with
Speaker 3: her and as we believe that the face plate of
Speaker 3: the stereo was in her handbag as well, so she
Speaker 3: had possibly parked her car somewhere.
Speaker 2: Yes, well, we know that when they went to Rachelle's
Speaker 2: place later that all the lights were on and as
Speaker 2: if someone had just walked out. I probably think she
Speaker 2: was running a bit late, to be honest with you,
Speaker 2: and leaving the lights on was no big deal because
Speaker 2: it would have been dark well that time in the afternoon,
Speaker 2: and we know that she was She couldn't have been
Speaker 2: intercepted there because the car was found at the car
Speaker 2: park behind the pub with a face plate of the
Speaker 2: cassette missing and also the club lock on the car,
Speaker 2: so it wouldn't have been the case if that had
Speaker 2: been earlier.
Speaker 3: This is a question for me, what do you make
Speaker 3: of the stereo still being missing to this day?
Speaker 2: Well, I would you know. I could only think that
Speaker 2: what the offender has done discarding her item along the
Speaker 2: way after her body was after she was murdered, that
Speaker 2: just has not just been located. I would strongly suggest
Speaker 2: that it's been discarded because you're carrying around something, it's
Speaker 2: evidentary value that to say that that was rachelle stereo
Speaker 2: and why if you've got possession of it. So I'd
Speaker 2: imagine that we haven't found all the items that were
Speaker 2: in her car. Certainly her handbag and shoes were later
Speaker 2: recovered at various locations, but I would imagine that stereo
Speaker 2: would have been discarded.
Speaker 3: This is an anonymous question. Was the DNA testing as
Speaker 3: good as it is now? And can they run the
Speaker 3: DNA again from the sheet?
Speaker 2: DNA is an evolving technology day by day, and I
Speaker 2: know from a previous homicide investigation that I had flagged
Speaker 2: an item to be re examined for instantly by the
Speaker 2: Department of Analytical Laboratories, and in two thousand and nine
Speaker 2: I took that item over to Dallas, Texas for a
Speaker 2: further examination of what they call mitochondrial DNA. DNA has
Speaker 2: improved leaps and bounds since two thousand and one, and
Speaker 2: it may be worth another chance or another try to
Speaker 2: re examine those exhibits.
Speaker 3: Yet again, Chris says, did any patrons of the Bargo
Speaker 3: Hotel ever see Rochelle that night at the pub? Are
Speaker 3: there any eyewitnesses of her in the establishment, having a
Speaker 3: drink or meal, etc.
Speaker 4: Well, I can answer that one.
Speaker 3: The Bargo Hotel wasn't canvassed until very late, so people's
Speaker 3: recollections may not have been entirely clear by the time
Speaker 3: they were questioned, some of them weeks later. We know
Speaker 3: that there's no one that can definitively say that Rochelle
Speaker 3: was in the Bargo Hotel that night. Did you want
Speaker 3: to add anything on that, Damien.
Speaker 2: It's a Thursday evening. I believe it was a topless
Speaker 2: night with bar maids there, etc. Unless there was CCT
Speaker 2: footage there inside the hotel, which we believe there wasn't any.
Speaker 2: It's difficult to say what people saw because you know,
Speaker 2: you give a general description of a female of a person,
Speaker 2: and a lot of people will say, oh, yes, I
Speaker 2: think I saw someone sitting in the corner like that,
Speaker 2: but it may not be the person at all. So
Speaker 2: they did. Unfortunately it was a couple of weeks later
Speaker 2: that they came as the hotel. That should have been
Speaker 2: done very soon after Rochelle's body was found.
Speaker 3: Could you imagine Rachelle would have gone to the Bargo
Speaker 3: pub if she knew it was Topless Waitress Night as well,
Speaker 3: and had gone to that particular venue.
Speaker 1: I don't think she would have known it was Topless
Speaker 1: Waitress Night because we didn't have anything to do with
Speaker 1: the Bargo Hotel. So I don't believe she ever went
Speaker 1: in there. I don't believe that she ever wanted to
Speaker 1: go there if she was meeting someone that she knew,
Speaker 1: which we think is the case, There's no isn't to
Speaker 1: meet them at the Bargo Hotel because she knew them
Speaker 1: and she didn't go there. That wasn't a place where
Speaker 1: we would go. We'd never been there.
Speaker 3: Okay, Shannon says, does Damien think a second person he's
Speaker 3: involved in Rochelle's murder and is there any evidence to
Speaker 3: suggest this?
Speaker 2: No, I don't believe there's two people involved. And the
Speaker 2: reason why I say this because at the crime scene,
Speaker 2: a cement leaders tried to be priced off the tank
Speaker 2: where Rochelle's body was found lying by her side because
Speaker 2: that was heavy and that was prized open. So how
Speaker 2: two people have been there? It would have been easier
Speaker 2: to open that tank and to hide her body, but
Speaker 2: that wasn't the case. And we also have to go
Speaker 2: back to the witness reports on at GIRoA where they
Speaker 2: say that they saw a male standing over top of
Speaker 2: a body that appeared to be on the ground at
Speaker 2: the rear of the car.
Speaker 3: And just further to that, there was only ever sightings
Speaker 3: of one person in a car after that. Remember the
Speaker 3: couple that were coming back from Woollongong after dinner and
Speaker 3: they saw someone slouched behind the steering wheel in and
Speaker 3: around the spot where Rochelle's body was found in a car.
Speaker 3: So that also suggests that maybe there was only one
Speaker 3: person there at that time, But in fact we haven't
Speaker 3: We don't know of another person being sighted there.
Speaker 4: We can't rule it out though now you.
Speaker 2: Can't rule it out. But I take it back on
Speaker 2: that and having been to the site and I know
Speaker 2: that road well myself. At night, it's very very dark
Speaker 2: there and no street lighting, so you'd rely on your
Speaker 2: high beam of your motor vehicle traveling that stretch the
Speaker 2: road because of wildlife in the area. And he was
Speaker 2: a person was seen slumped down trying to hide or
Speaker 2: secrete himself lower in the seat by a couple driving past.
Speaker 2: So I still firmly believe that there's one offender involved here,
Speaker 2: And for the obvious other obvious reasons where the other
Speaker 2: witnesses have said this. Had there been two offenders, surely
Speaker 2: one would have been the other one would have been cited.
Speaker 2: But you leave yourself open to a very dangerous predicament
Speaker 2: here because two people are involved. People talk, and so
Speaker 2: far none of this has happened, and it's hard to
Speaker 2: hide this forever twenty odd years.
Speaker 3: Now, Damien, this one's for you as well from Stuart.
Speaker 3: How can vital evidence get lost in a murder case?
Speaker 3: What can be done to recover it? Is this common look?
Speaker 2: Unfortunately it does happen. Not all systems are perfect. However,
Speaker 2: I always threated it exhibits as a matter of priority.
Speaker 2: Once they come into your possession, there is a change.
Speaker 2: There is a chain of possession of them, and that
Speaker 2: they are recall ordered, that they are then secured into
Speaker 2: an exhibit room and they're booked up. And the old
Speaker 2: days it used to be booked up manually, but nowadays
Speaker 2: it's on an electronic record on the computer system. And
Speaker 2: it is highly frustrating when an exhibit goes missing. Now
Speaker 2: sometimes it's the case of things go wrong in the
Speaker 2: exhibit room, and often with a large amount of drugs
Speaker 2: that they have to be disposed very quickly after being analyzed.
Speaker 2: And yet exhibits are the most important aspect of this
Speaker 2: case because it's something, it's tangible evidence, it's real, it's physical,
Speaker 2: and it's something you can show during any trial. And
Speaker 2: over the years you have to be meticulous in relation
Speaker 2: to your record keeping of your exhibits and that should
Speaker 2: be occurring and should occur continuously occurring.
Speaker 3: Now I should probably point out that New South Wales
Speaker 3: police have greatly improved their systems around holding on to
Speaker 3: exhibits and storing them.
Speaker 4: Is that fair to say, Jamien?
Speaker 2: Oh, Look, the processes have changed over the years, and
Speaker 2: I believe now that the police force has a great
Speaker 2: system now of the exhibits and how they're secured and
Speaker 2: how they're stored, and yet how important they are the
Speaker 2: cases as well, particularly the unsolved, So they are categorized
Speaker 2: and they are secured away, often in an unnamed location
Speaker 2: just for the security of the brief. But I do
Speaker 2: know that our exhibit processes have dramatically improved since today.
Speaker 2: I joined the cops back in the early eighties.
Speaker 4: That's good to know.
Speaker 3: Amanda says, has this scenario that they kill a leured
Speaker 3: Rochelle to the South Coast in her car to.
Speaker 4: See his walking shore.
Speaker 3: During said journey, he sexually assaulted her and it escalated
Speaker 3: to murdering her.
Speaker 2: Ever being considered, I believe this has been considered, and
Speaker 2: we believe it's a sexually motivated attack and the lure
Speaker 2: to get her down to see this post walking Shaw
Speaker 2: may have been a key factor in this because she
Speaker 2: was so excited that she was going to have the
Speaker 2: access to one for that weekend and it had been
Speaker 2: promised to her by her former boss, Kevin. Now you
Speaker 2: could say this may have been a lure. I'm not
Speaker 2: sure how the investigators were thinking about that, but it
Speaker 2: just stands out to me that she was promised to
Speaker 2: be given something very extreamy valuable and something that she's
Speaker 2: a holden that and why wouldn't she be excited? So
Speaker 2: was that a lure for her to unfortunately meet her demise?
Speaker 2: And as I said, I believe it's a sexually motivated attack.
Speaker 4: Leanne said.
Speaker 3: Are the police looking into whether the key suspect actually
Speaker 3: did have a commodore vehicle altered to look like a
Speaker 3: walking Shaw in the garage of his Gorilla apartment, which
Speaker 3: may have been used as bait.
Speaker 2: Well, we know that the word walking shaw was used.
Speaker 2: Now I know that during in the brief, the police
Speaker 2: have tracked every owner of those walking Shawls and interviewed them,
Speaker 2: and they provided a strong alibi. Now, you could get
Speaker 2: a body kit, yes, and make it look like a
Speaker 2: walking show, but you'd imagine how many commodores are out
Speaker 2: there that the police would have had to interview the
Speaker 2: owners who have modified their motor vehicles. I just believe
Speaker 2: that they slightly concentrated on a walking show.
Speaker 3: I did put this question to police not long ago,
Speaker 3: and we didn't get a specific answer back. So make
Speaker 3: of that what you will. It doesn't mean that they're
Speaker 3: not investigating it. They very well may be, but it's
Speaker 3: certainly not something that they're giving us information about. Next
Speaker 3: question is from Craig. Do you think Rochelle could have
Speaker 3: stumbled across fraudulent activity at Camden Holden and this could
Speaker 3: have been linked to her murder?
Speaker 2: Look, this is another good motivation. It may have been,
Speaker 2: It may have been something was dodgy, Something was dodgy.
Speaker 2: Not sure. I know that later on Kevin was released
Speaker 2: from Camden Oldhen over some issues, but look, it would
Speaker 2: have had to be in hundreds of thousands of dollars
Speaker 2: for this to be really exposed. I don't believe the
Speaker 2: amount was I think the mount was minute. I think
Speaker 2: it was under six thousand dollars. Whatever, some issues with
Speaker 2: some money. As I said before, it was a sexually
Speaker 2: motivated murder.
Speaker 3: It's important to mention Kevin Stephen Carrell strenuously denies any
Speaker 3: involvement in Michelle's murder and has never been charged. He
Speaker 3: has willingly participated in three records of interview with police
Speaker 3: and provided his DNA to the investigation. A coroner presiding
Speaker 3: over Rochelle's inquest made an open finding. Susie says, is
Speaker 3: there any chance of a retrial for any of Kevin
Speaker 3: Stephen Carell's alleged sexual assaults in the nineteen eighties.
Speaker 2: I don't believe. So they've been formally acquitted by a jury.
Speaker 2: The end of the matter. You can't be you can't
Speaker 2: go to trial twice on this because you've already been
Speaker 2: found not guilty by a jury. And look, he has
Speaker 2: his right of your charge. You're innocent until proven guilty.
Speaker 2: And on these four separate matters before the district court,
Speaker 2: he was found not guilty so therefore the judicial system
Speaker 2: cannot place me for the courts again on these matters
Speaker 2: that he has been discharged of.
Speaker 3: And also acknowledged that back in the nineteen eighties it
Speaker 3: was very difficult to get a conviction for a sexual assault.
Speaker 4: Would you say that that's a fair comment.
Speaker 2: Damien, Absolutely, And look at the tides of tune they
Speaker 2: were the last forty odd years in relation to how
Speaker 2: we treat victims of sexual assault. You know, the old days,
Speaker 2: they were canon follows. They'll vigorously cross examined, often by
Speaker 2: some heavy defense barristers and legal aid and made to
Speaker 2: feel shame full of what happened to them and as
Speaker 2: if they were they're the ones to blame. But nowadays
Speaker 2: the way that the courts and the opposite of the
Speaker 2: Director of Public Prosecutions and the new Southwest Police and
Speaker 2: in fact I can say for this for all territories
Speaker 2: and state police forces in Australia and victims are now
Speaker 2: well treated in the sort of very very embarrassing situations.
Speaker 3: An anonymous person has asked, is there any evidence that
Speaker 3: links the seven Mile Beach Jiroa area to any of
Speaker 3: the suspects in Rochelle's case?
Speaker 2: Not at this stage. The only thing I can say
Speaker 2: is that that road was well known by the prime
Speaker 2: suspect in this matter, because he traveled it each day
Speaker 2: from the Illawarra to Nara for work.
Speaker 3: Okay, what happened to Rochelle's dog ROLFI after she passed?
Speaker 1: After I think it was the Sunday that we found
Speaker 1: out that she been murdered. I think I took Ralfie
Speaker 1: or Mum and Dad might have in the car back
Speaker 1: to Mum and dads and I he just cried and
Speaker 1: cried and cried. It was horrific, just horrific, because he
Speaker 1: was her baby, this giant bulldog. She would sometimes have
Speaker 1: him in bed with her. It was disgusting, but they
Speaker 1: just adored each other. I remember her sitting in the
Speaker 1: recliner and Ralphie would be lying up her side with
Speaker 1: his head on her shoulder, and he used to drool
Speaker 1: and he snored, and he was It was beautiful, beautiful,
Speaker 1: big dumb thing. But yeah, no, we kept him at
Speaker 1: Mum and Dad's with their dogs, and he lived until.
Speaker 2: I think he was eleven. He lived a long time.
Speaker 1: Yeah, No, Mum and Dad cared for him and they
Speaker 1: had Rochelle's cap Momo as well, so yeah, at them
Speaker 1: for a very very long time.
Speaker 3: We'll answer more of your questions soon. New episodes of
Speaker 3: De Rochelle drop on Fridays. Visit deroshelle dot com doau
Speaker 3: for more, and if you have any information you want
Speaker 3: to share with me, Ashley Hanson, you can do so confidentially.
Speaker 3: Please send an email to de Rochelle at news dot com.
Speaker 3: Doa you or you can follow the Deershelle podcast official
Speaker 3: discussion group on Facebook