On Friday, 13th of September 1994, police were called to 64 Lawless Drive, Cranbourne North. Upon arrival responding officers found an 18-year-old girl, Sally Armstrong, brutally murdered on the floor of her living room. A number of suspects were identified along with numerous possible murder weapons. All suspects had alibis for the events that occurred on that Friday. Years later, the suspect has yet to be apprehended, raising the ultimate question of …. Who killed Sally?
Prescription medication was found at the crime scene. At first investigators thought that, Sally was in fact under medication, leading to depression, thus a possible suicide case, however after several tests, Sally’s body returned negative for any drugs. This leads to the speculation that the killer was indeed under medication, perhaps resulting in psychotic side effects, leading to Sally’s death. Investigators followed up on the pharmacy the medication was purchased from; however, no records were kept, thus resulting in a dead end for the case.
A small fine china teacup was also evident near the victim’s body. Investigators first though there was no link between the object and the case, however DNA and fingerprint tests, found salvia from Sally’s boyfriend. Tim, Sally’s boyfriend claimed he was at a basketball game the night of the murder. Investigators found that his alibi checked out, ruling Tim out as a suspect. In his statement to the police, he claimed Sally was well loved and no one he was aware of, wanted to hurt her. So who did then?
Upon arrival of the crime scene, police found a standard kitchen knife that matched the cuts across the victim. It was obvious that the knife was a murder weapon. However, no fingerprints or DNA were found of the knife, not even traces of Sally’s blood. It is clear the knife was used to kill Sally, however why would the killer, go through the effort of eliminating any trace of the crime on the murder weapon and leave it at the crime scene. It’s almost as the killer wanted to create a puzzling scene.
A bottle of alcohol was found at the crime scene, half empty. Along with the fine china cup, knife and medication, police speculate that the suspect was under the influence of alcohol and medication resulting in the gruesome slashing of Sally. Unable to find any fingerprints of DNA, police were unable to follow up on any leads. Though it has no clear link to Sally’s murder, the presence of the bottle at the scene paints the picture of the mindset of the killer.
A small torch was found in Sally’s hand when police arrived at the scene. This suggests that the murder happened in the dark, Sally never saw her killer. Upon further investigation it was found that the Power circuit to Sally’s house was cut, explaining why she needed a torch. What is truly interesting is how the flash light had no fingerprints, even that of Sally’s, despite being found in her hands. Police looked discovered her fingerprints were removed with acid. Why would the killer go through such lengths to eliminate all traces of evidence, while leaving the scene intact?
Reading glasses and an empty wallet were also found at the scene. According to Sally’s boyfriend, the glasses did not belong to her, resulting in the possibility of them belonging to another family member or the killer. The wallet is a mystery own its own. According to Tim, it was her fathers wallet. Sally’s father passed away from a car accident 5 years prior to the murder. Police didn’t identify a wallet to be on the body of Mr. Armstrong. This raises the questions such as, why did Sally have her father’s wallet on her. Was the killer someone who knew her father? Was Sally’s death the result of an old grudge?
Masking tape was placed across Sally’s mouth upon discovery of her body. It is obvious this was done to silence Sally. However, it also brings to attention that the killer may have possibly violated Sally. Interestingly enough it was only her mouth that was taped, her hands and legs were free. The killer wanted Sally to be quite but she was free to struggle… Why? What exactly did the killer want and do to Sally before he took her life.
Double A batteries were scattered along the crime scene. Strangely enough, the batteries are the only piece of evidence that benefited the investigation. Partial fingerprints were identified on the batteries but not enough to identify any suspects. However with advancement in technology over the years, police are hopeful that eventually they may be able to identify the killer using the partial prints gathered at the crim scene.
So Who killed Sally? After decades the suspect is still unknown. All evidence is now on display at the Museum of Melbourne, as the Sally’s next of kin have given up on the investigation. Despite this the evidence found is on display, as per request by the family. They claim they based their decision to ensure her memory lived on. Could the suspect still be out there? Does he or she, visit the exhibition to look at the scene he/she left behind?
We still dont know, who Killed Sally...