Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, 43, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 - #9

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes Kimster, I believe an altercation on the side of the road also. It clearly states that GBC and ABC were residing in the house together that night and he alerted the police when he noticed she didn't come home. NONE of us know what was going on under that roof. Maybe they were trying to reconcile, maybe separated and GBC was out that night shirking his responsibilities and she got furious. Maybe she was still very much in love with him. We can't say, because we don't know BUT in my opinion, something caused them both to be in separate cars and chase/ follow/ pull each other over? IDK, but given the circumstances it seems a likely theory. Only reason I can think there would be 2 cars of interest.


At the risk of sounding curt, your musings of car chases is quite far fetched considering the house has been declared a crime scene by the investigating detective. :what:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/police-search-under-way-for-missing-mother-of-three-at-brookfield/story-e6freon6-1226334962242

Furthermore, Baden-Clay corrected his initial story and says she was at home when he last saw her. There is a timeline available that details all facts publicly known if you go back through earlier threads. The stated morning walk by GBC is an assumption provided by him to police - there is no proof whatsoever that ABC went for a walk that morning or the previous night.
 
If any Qld ambo relayed that info to anyone else, they would surely lose their job. They are bound by strict rules.
 
In one of the photos posted yesterday (Looking at the car colours) there was a person sitting to the side of the car with no shirt.

I couldn't make out the face but looked like a young slim body.
 
If any Qld ambo relayed that info to anyone else, they would surely lose their job. They are bound by strict rules.

There were quite a few other people around the car in photos though.
 
Oh poo....there goes my theory.......I'll get back into my box now.....lol

Lol - but yes it does seem like towing is the only explanation for the cars that close, slow and with lights down, don't you think? I've been annoying my household to come up with something better.
 
A case which is based largely or exlcusively on circumstantial evidence is much more difficult for prosecutors. If there is insufficient direct evidence (such as DNA, eye witnesses, finger prints, CCTV footage) to convince the DPP that there is a good chancce to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt then a trial will not take place. It may well costs ,illions of dollars and if unsuccessful will generally mean that the accused person(s) cannot be charged again. Where a person is charged solely on the basis of circumstantial evidence a jury must be convinced that the only expalanation consistent with that evidence is the guilt of the person charged. Circumstantial evidence is rarely that strong. It wll often be enough to make it highly likely that the accused committed the offence and be enough to make them liable for civil action, and to make them guilty in the eyes of the media and public. If the accused is acquitted in such circumstances then the very media outlets and public who demanded quick, and often premature, action will be out for the prosecution's blood.

An interesting case in Tasmania recently may convince prosecutors to rely on circumstantial evidence more than they have in the past. The jury in R v Blyth Neill-Fraser convicted the defendent without a body or forensic evidence. The verdict was subsequently upheld by the Court of Criminal Appeal. Whilst not binding in Queensland, the decision of the CCA could have significant impact on cases such as this one , where circumstantial evidence may be heavily relied upon. IMO
 
A case which is based largely or exlcusively on circumstantial evidence is much more difficult for prosecutors. If there is insufficient direct evidence (such as DNA, eye witnesses, finger prints, CCTV footage) to convince the DPP that there is a good chancce to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt then a trial will not take place. It may well costs ,illions of dollars and if unsuccessful will generally mean that the accused person(s) cannot be charged again. Where a person is charged solely on the basis of circumstantial evidence a jury must be convinced that the only expalanation consistent with that evidence is the guilt of the person charged. Circumstantial evidence is rarely that strong. It wll often be enough to make it highly likely that the accused committed the offence and be enough to make them liable for civil action, and to make them guilty in the eyes of the media and public. If the accused is acquitted in such circumstances then the very media outlets and public who demanded quick, and often premature, action will be out for the prosecution's blood.

Exactly, so a speedy arrest is not a good thing.

Patience is needed as hard as it is.
 
I think I've read every post on here over the past few days and now find myself checking this thread before my emails :)

Are you allowed to post on gossip ?? If not please feel free to remove this as I am not sure on what is allowed.

<modsnip>

If you go to youtube and watch the interview of him with the media where his sister is standing beside him you will notice that he shakes his head in a NO manner whilst saying
"helped the police as much as he can" which suggests to me that he knows more than he is willing to share and is blatantly lying. His sister is also biting her lower lip which suggests being nervous. And the "Thankyou, I'm sorry" comment, this made me feel uncomfortable.

His family has not shown any signs of distress, well anything that has been captured by the media either through photos or video footage.

And whats with that big pash by the inlaws NBC and EBC ????
 
If any Qld ambo relayed that info to anyone else, they would surely lose their job. They are bound by strict rules.

People are only human and people blab, even cops.
 
At the risk of sounding curt, your musings of car chases is quite far fetched considering the house has been declared a crime scene by the investigating detective. :what:

Furthermore, Baden-Clay corrected his initial story and says she was at home when he last saw her.

Here's my theory for the two cars seen at Kholo. Which is the first thing I've been able to come up with that provides a decent motivation for accomplice involvement. The way I see it, unless a 2nd person was involved in murder planning or discussion from the start, it still seems a bit of a stretch to call up a lover or relative late at night to help dispose of a murder victim.


(1) Perp goes out into bush - leaves car lights on for illumination while dragging body down to river.

(2)Flattens battery (or something else that stops car starting - wet distributor?).

(3)Has to call for help at this point, cos otherwise he's stuck in very compromising situation - HAS to get out of there. Can't call RACQ, no way to do it alone. Calls for help with breakdown story.

(4)Person comes out to help, maybe for some reason they can't jump start car(no cables?) but has to tow back instead?

(5) Eventually gets home and is able to charge battery (maybe jump leads are in other BC car) so when police turn up the next morning, car is charged and they can drive it off for testing ok

So accomplice may not have helped with body at all, but just went to help with car breakdown. They'd see through the story soon enough, but there are reasons for them to just go along with it for the moment:

(a) you're out in the bush alone with guy you realise is a murderer - only sane choice is to help him and stay in his good books until you get back to town
(b)you don't realise what was happening until a day later when he reports wife missing, then you suddenly realise what he was doing out there, and that you're now an unknowing accomplice, having already given significant assistance?

And then even a quite innocent person can be in a dilemma over what to do next, since you'd just helped cover up a murder.

And a less innocent person might have financial motivations, eg Ali's death will cause financial dramas and if it's found to be murder the life insurance will not be going to the original recipient. Other family members' home was mortgaged for business loan so if all that falls through there's quite a motivation for family to help cover up.
 
If any Qld ambo relayed that info to anyone else, they would surely lose their job. They are bound by strict rules.
There were a number of bystanders? Could have been one of them?
 
A case which is based largely or exlcusively on circumstantial evidence is much more difficult for prosecutors. If there is insufficient direct evidence (such as DNA, eye witnesses, finger prints, CCTV footage) to convince the DPP that there is a good chancce to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt then a trial will not take place. It may well costs ,illions of dollars and if unsuccessful will generally mean that the accused person(s) cannot be charged again. Where a person is charged solely on the basis of circumstantial evidence a jury must be convinced that the only expalanation consistent with that evidence is the guilt of the person charged. Circumstantial evidence is rarely that strong. It wll often be enough to make it highly likely that the accused committed the offence and be enough to make them liable for civil action, and to make them guilty in the eyes of the media and public. If the accused is acquitted in such circumstances then the very media outlets and public who demanded quick, and often premature, action will be out for the prosecution's blood.
Yay Hawkins the voice of reason. :clap:
 
Good morning everyone!

I've been a long time lurker, reading, thinking and consuming the info posted since near the beginning.

There is something that I have read on another forum and have wondered if any of you sleuths here have heard this gossip (please go easy on me if this has already been discussed and discounted on earlier threads!!)...

Supposedly the first ambo to assist the car accident victim saw that the driver was unable to release his seat belt. Probably due to the airbag! Ambo told him he'd have to remove his shirt. The injured driver went into some sort of pannicked response. The shirt was removed. According to the 'friend of the ambo', drivers chest was markedly scratched and bruised.



Anyone hear anything of this?

Also, IMO, this dark navy/steel blue/grey CRV could not possibly be seen as a BLUE car at 4am by a passing motorist. In the pitch black of pre-dawn the car would appear as BLACK!

Once again MOO.

Keep up the good work sleuths!
I heard that too, he also apparently kept saying he had sore ribs, but they couldn't find much wrong with him, perhaps trying to blame the scratch marks on the 'accident' .
 
I suspect that it didn't happen at all, the shirt removal thing.

Agree with you there Karo. Does seem far fetched, eh? If he couldn't remove the seat belt, how the heck could he remove his shirt?

People are running wild with this stuff. Maybe Casey Anthony was the lover!:what:

All sheer fantasy IMO.
 
If we assume that she was having an affair, then all theories which point to her having followed the husband to the bush go out the window IMO. Why would she follow him? No, don't believe that is what happened.
 
Motive? Could be that he found out that she was having an affair? ... IMO
 
In one of the photos posted yesterday (Looking at the car colours) there was a person sitting to the side of the car with no shirt.

I couldn't make out the face but looked like a young slim body.

I thought that there is someone in the driver seat without a shirt on or is it the air bag (sorry not sure if that has already been discussed)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
183
Guests online
4,255
Total visitors
4,438

Forum statistics

Threads
593,150
Messages
17,981,666
Members
229,035
Latest member
Searching4Answers2
Back
Top