Troubled Waters – Episode 7: "Where Did She Go?"
Release Date: June 16, 2024
Host: Julia Robson (PI & Narrator)
Producer: Clare McGrath
Theme: A critical re-examination of the last night of Louisa Ioannidis’ life, the plausibility of witness accounts, and the unresolved questions still haunting her loved ones.
Episode Overview
This pivotal episode scrutinizes the final hours of Louisa Ioannidis, whose mysterious death in 2011 was swiftly ruled accidental despite numerous lingering questions. Host and investigator Julia Robson and producer Clare McGrath challenge the accepted narrative, reconstructing events and exploring whether key witness statements hold up to scrutiny. Their focus centers on two main questions:
- Could Jo (Louisa’s boyfriend at the time) genuinely see Louisa running toward Darebin Creek as he claimed?
- What exactly did Jo do upon discovering she hadn’t returned home?
Personal accounts, forensic doubts, and an on-location experiment combine to create a compelling, uneasy portrait of a case that might not be as closed as authorities once declared.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
The Account of Louisa’s Disappearance ([01:01]–[06:04])
- Revisiting Jo’s Statement:
Jo claimed he saw Louisa bolt out the door around 9:45pm in her pink dressing gown, heading toward the creek. His story, uncorroborated by direct interview (he declined participation), is central to the investigation. - Unanswered Questions:
Was Louisa heading to a friend’s place? Seeking support after a breakup? Disoriented after a failed airport trip? Suffering psychosis? The narrative remains shrouded in ambiguity.
"The purpose of this podcast is to ask questions that we think should have been asked, not to provide answers."
— Julia Robson, [02:09]
- Jo’s Actions the Following Morning:
Jo reportedly searched for clues, wrote in Louisa’s journal (something he’d never done before), and called people about her whereabouts. Louisa’s packed bag and essentials remained untouched. - Police and Coroner’s Conclusion:
Both found no third-party involvement. However, even the coroner could not determine if Louisa’s death was suicide, accidental, or misadventure.
"The evidence does not enable me to be satisfied to the appropriate standard of proof whether she intentionally took her own life or whether she died from accident or misadventure."
— Coroner’s Remark, paraphrased by Julia, [05:55]
Doubts About Jo’s Story ([06:04]–[10:07])
- Louisa’s Friend Indigo Refutes the ‘Creek’ Narrative:
Louisa, described as rebellious yet never secretive about her hangouts, had no apparent connection to Darebin Creek.
“In no way, shape or form do I think that she would hang out at the creek. No, never.”
— Indigo, Louisa’s friend, [06:25]
- Analysis of Louisa’s Options:
If escaping, more logical routes were available; a direct path to a friend’s home didn’t require passing the creek. - Possible Disorientation or Mental Health Crisis:
The timing of Louisa’s behavior — composed during an earlier neighborly phone call — leaves the mental health hypothesis uncertain.
Domestic Violence Context and “Safety Planning” ([10:07]–[12:28])
- Expert Insight:
Jolene Allitt, DART Institute Australia: Survivors of domestic abuse often “safety-plan,” meticulously monitoring abusers for signs of escalation—this could explain Louisa’s late-night call to Jo.
“We know that survivors are constantly safety planning and preparing for what may take place… minute by minute, within seconds, [monitoring] their abusers.”
— Jolene Allitt, [10:07]
- Implication:
Louisa’s call (“Jo, where are you? I’m waiting for you”) could have reflected anxiety, not longing or routine communication.
On-Location Reconstruction: Could Jo Really See Louisa? ([13:44]–[24:27])
-
The Experiment Setup ([13:44]–[16:28]):
- Julia and Clare return, at night, to Louisa’s old street. Armed with a replica pink robe, they try to test Jo's version — could someone really spot a person running toward the creek, at that distance, under those lighting conditions?
-
Practical Findings ([18:56]–[23:41]):
- Standing at the same vantage point Jo described, they find it impossible to clearly see a person — let alone recognize a pink robe — beyond 145 meters, much less the 370 meters to the street’s end.
- Viewers could barely discern shadows, and never the color or direction, especially given 2011’s even dimmer lighting.
“I don’t know how Jo was able to pick Louisa out from so far away. If you ran down that side street, there is no way I could have seen that.”
— Clare McGrath, [23:56]
- Implications:
- The experiment strongly casts doubt on Jo’s claim of seeing Louisa run all the way to the creek, fueling calls for a more thorough police reconstruction at the time.
Revisiting Jo’s Actions & the Discovery ([24:27]–[27:24])
- Jo’s Next Move:
After allegedly seeing Louisa’s robe (and body) in the creek, Jo turns back, not raising alarms or returning to the site even as days pass. - Delayed Discovery:
Louisa’s body remains in the creek for another eight days until found by passers-by.
“The only person who knew Louisa — or at least her dressing gown — was in the creek before the tragic discovery was Jo.”
— Julia Robson, [27:11]
- Police Response:
Asked if a reconstruction of Jo’s account was ever done, the police said they “considered there to be no value in conducting a reconstruction.”
The Aftermath: Family and Friends’ Pain & Doubt ([27:24]–[28:13])
- Indigo’s Perspective:
In confusion, Indigo recalls desperately seeking confirmation of Louisa’s fate, pointing out the oddity and emotional distance in Jo’s explanation.
“She slipped, she hit a rock ... She drowned or she fell ... I’ll never forget that. Because he said it like that. And I was just screaming at that point ... the penny had dropped, that she was dead.”
— Indigo, [27:39]
- Unshakeable Uncertainty:
Both investigators and loved ones grapple with the remaining possibilities: Was Louisa’s entry to the creek purposeful, accidental, or forced?
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
| Timestamp | Quote | Speaker | |-----------|-------|---------| | [02:09] | "The purpose of this podcast is to ask questions that we think should have been asked, not to provide answers." | Julia Robson | | [05:55] | "The evidence does not enable me to be satisfied... whether she intentionally took her own life or whether she died from accident or misadventure." | Coroner (paraphrased) | | [06:25] | "In no way, shape or form do I think that she would hang out at the creek. No, never." | Indigo | | [10:07] | "Survivors are constantly safety planning and preparing for what may take place... minute by minute, within seconds..." | Jolene Allitt | | [23:56] | "From where I was standing, you could have headed in any direction and I wouldn't have been able to see you, even though I was trying to spot you." | Clare McGrath | | [27:39] | "She slipped, she hit a rock ... She drowned or she fell ... I’ll never forget that. Because he said it like that." | Indigo |
Timestamps for Key Segments
- Jo’s Statement and Early Questions ([01:01]–[06:04])
- Creek Connection Disputed ([06:04]–[10:07])
- Domestic Violence Expert’s Perspective ([10:07]–[12:28])
- On-Site Street Experiment Begins ([13:44]–[18:56])
- Visibility Findings and Key Takeaways ([18:56]–[24:27])
- Discovery and Aftermath ([24:27]–[28:13])
Conclusion & Takeaways
The episode’s in-depth reenactment exposes significant flaws and unanswered questions in the police investigation of Louisa’s death, particularly regarding Jo’s statement and the practical realities of that fateful night. Despite insistence from authorities, the hosts and Louisa’s loved ones remain unconvinced that all avenues—especially third-party involvement and the realities of domestic violence—were properly explored.
The story closes with a lingering sense of loss and injustice, reinforcing the need to keep asking hard questions, especially when official narratives fall short.
Trigger Warning:
This episode discusses domestic violence and death. If you or someone you know needs support, please contact Lifeline (13 11 14 in Australia) or your local support services.