Body in the water: Why didn't homicide squad investigate? | Australian Story

Key Concepts: Suspicious death in water, domestic violence history, homicide investigation, poor policing, assumption of drowning, suicide vs. homicide, neck abnormalities, manual strangulation, unascertained cause of death, lack of drowning evidence.

Initial Assessment and Suspicion:

The speaker emphasizes that a body found in water should immediately be treated as suspicious. The presence of water does not automatically indicate accidental drowning or suicide. The speaker's initial reaction to such a scenario would be to consider foul play.

Importance of Background Information and Homicide Notification:

Upon identification of the deceased and discovery of a history of domestic violence, the speaker asserts that homicide investigators should have been notified immediately. The history of domestic violence is a critical factor that elevates the suspicion of homicide.

Critique of Police Investigation:

The speaker expresses a strong opinion that the policing in this case was inadequate ("poor policing"). The speaker believes there was a premature assumption that the death was a simple drowning, without sufficient investigation into other possibilities. The speaker highlights the importance of considering both suicide and homicide as potential causes of death, stating, "On surface of it, it could be a suicide or could be a homicide. You just don't know."

Concerns Regarding Neck Abnormalities and Strangulation:

The speaker specifically mentions "abnormalities in the neck" as a significant concern. These abnormalities raise the possibility of manual strangulation. The speaker explicitly states, "I don't think manual strangulation in this case can be excluded." This statement suggests that the physical evidence on the body was not consistent with a typical drowning and warranted further investigation into potential strangulation.

Recommendation for Unascertained Cause of Death:

Due to the concerns raised, the speaker recommended that the cause of death be officially recorded as "unascertained." This recommendation reflects the speaker's belief that there was insufficient evidence to definitively conclude that the death was a drowning.

Lack of Evidence Supporting Drowning:

The speaker concludes by stating, "The evidence for her having drowned is slight." This statement underscores the speaker's overall assessment that the investigation was flawed and that the initial assumption of drowning was not supported by the available evidence. The speaker implies that a more thorough investigation was necessary to determine the true cause of death.

Synthesis/Conclusion:

The speaker strongly suggests that the death investigation was mishandled due to a premature assumption of drowning and a failure to adequately consider the possibility of homicide, particularly in light of the victim's history of domestic violence and the presence of neck abnormalities. The speaker's professional opinion is that the cause of death should have been classified as unascertained, pending further investigation. The lack of conclusive evidence supporting drowning further reinforces the speaker's concerns about the thoroughness and objectivity of the initial investigation.