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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree Keybordem. Sometimes even people who seem to be law abiding citizens have something to hide. This case in particular is a great example of that. The police can't say, "Oh look at them displaying the Aussie Flag, they are just a nice old Ma and Pa couple, we won't search there". Lol

They'd never catch anyone if they thought like that.
 
Australian Police have a lot of power to enable them to do their job. I'd say even more than police in the USA. Teenagers shot in Kings Cross is one example. They were told to stop, pedestrians were at risk, they didn't stop, police opened fire. For our police, instances that would start a riot in the USA are a common occurrence. So they should be too. You do the crime, expect to be treated like a criminal.
 
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!
 
BrizzychickinUSA said:
Yeah Good Point...but wouldnt you being known, or having your name in an undersirable's cell phone give police reasonable suspicion. Or isnt even walking around with someone undesirably known to police, enough to bring about a search....or how about a call in the past to Police regarding that persons unusual behaviour?
Click to expand...

Hi BrizzychickinUSA,

Yes, in some situations, simple association with another person known to police is apparently sufficient reason for an officer to insist on a search. This happened to my brother once. He happened to stop and talk to a friend in a city street in passing just to say g'day, in the middle of a lovely sunny day. The friend had prior convictions so a police officer decided their apparent association was enough reason to physically search my brother. My brother's long hair and happy hello attracted police attention. Sad but true.
 
oreily85 said:
Is there a block button on this type of forum? I'm on my phone and can't see anything standing out. There's a couple of members driving me to distraction with their posts lol
Click to expand...

Not sure, but maybe it could be done by going into their profile, maybe you can block from there? Some sites it can be done that way. ... and I hope I'm not one of posters annoying you? haha
 
Kimster said:
Does anyone here know the basic criteria for search warrants in Australia? For example, here in the States they have to list exactly what they are searching for.
Click to expand...

The search warrant info is also released to public in US...in Aus we don't get to see any of that at all.

The amount of info that does get released here regarding cases such as this one is miniscule compared to there where you have such things as "Discovery"...contains absolute mountains of info...pages & pages of documents/police notes etc etc.

News sites here will try to get as much info as possible using Freedom of Information Act...but I think the only way to really get all the info is by attending the court/trial.

The info released to public in Caylee Anthony & Zahra Baker cases were real eye openers for many Aussies.....the info on those cases is still on this forum??
 
Can we concentrate a bit on about how Allison's phone is missing. Surely, a phone is missing because it fell, was thrown, was stolen, or something else. Now, why, oh why would it be left on?
This is a SUPER CRITICAL point that keeps the husband out of it & I'm pretty positive that QPS thinks exactly the same thing as I do. So how about all of us put our theories forward to help them out....because some of you are really very clever.
The phone: Was still on, not in water, was in the area of Brookfield/Pullenvale. So, my theory is that it fell when she had been tackled or run over and that the person who did that to her didn't even notice that she had a phone on her....probably he went back to look for it and can't find it either. So, if you see a car stopping at the side of the road looking for something or someone in a park looking for something....could be the person you're looking for and near the spot where Allison went missing/was run over on her walk!
The missing phone also discounts any theory of suicide- because the phone would be wet if she jumped from a bridge and would not work...........& I'd like to see what forensics come up with!!
 
WheresColumbo said:
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!
Click to expand...
Yes it has been mentioned here in a list from (Keyboredom) which i searched for yesterday and is a great reference to keep handy.I was going to ask them to repost but heres the page of facts and other info based on the jungle drums ....thread2#page37 post905 worth a look
 
543 said:
Can we concentrate a bit on about how Allison's phone is missing. Surely, a phone is missing because it fell, was thrown, was stolen, or something else. Now, why, oh why would it be left on?
This is a SUPER CRITICAL point that keeps the husband out of it & I'm pretty positive that QPS thinks exactly the same thing as I do. So how about all of us put our theories forward to help them out....because some of you are really very clever.
Click to expand...

Maybe the perp or an accomplice took the phone for a "walk" to make it look like Alison had gone for a walk. Is the "triangulated area" mentioned by GPS anywhere near the roundabout, or on the way to where she was found or is it in another direction?
 
543 said:
Can we concentrate a bit on about how Allison's phone is missing. Surely, a phone is missing because it fell, was thrown, was stolen, or something else. Now, why, oh why would it be left on?
This is a SUPER CRITICAL point that keeps the husband out of it & I'm pretty positive that QPS thinks exactly the same thing as I do. So how about all of us put our theories forward to help them out....because some of you are really very clever.
Click to expand...

Just curious... what type of information do you think could be on the phone that would mean the husband is innocent? My thinking is, that no matter who did it the phone could still have been lost or thrown. The phone could have been disposed of at anytime after or during the act... by anyone.
Another way of saying what I mean is... why would finding the phone's locality put paid to the theory that her husband was guilty?
 
543 said:
Can we concentrate a bit on about how Allison's phone is missing. Surely, a phone is missing because it fell, was thrown, was stolen, or something else. Now, why, oh why would it be left on?
This is a SUPER CRITICAL point that keeps the husband out of it & I'm pretty positive that QPS thinks exactly the same thing as I do. So how about all of us put our theories forward to help them out....because some of you are really very clever.
Click to expand...
I don't know how her phone being on excludes anyone. But I'm going to hazard a guess at someone realising they still had her phone in their possession, which they took from her after she had been killed, and disposed off it afterwards, in an attempt to delay the discovery of her body. As the police have commented to the media, they believe Allison knew her killer, so I don't believe they are looking for a drunk driver who hit her and dumped her body. I believe she was killed by a family member or close friend when said person lost control and either accidentally killed her or planned her murder. I believe that it has been either thrown somewhere dense, or is hidden somewhere the police haven't looked yet.
 
AllyG said:
I don't know how her phone being on excludes anyone. But I'm going to hazard a guess at someone realising they still had her phone in their possession, which they took from her after she had been killed, and disposed off it afterwards, in an attempt to delay the discovery of her body. As the police have commented to the media, they believe Allison knew her killer, so I don't believe they are looking for a drunk driver who hit her and dumped her body. I believe she was killed by a family member or close friend when said person lost control and either accidentally killed her or planned her murder. I believe that it has been either thrown somewhere dense, or is hidden somewhere the police haven't looked yet.
Click to expand...

I agree. No matter where the phone is found, I don't see how it could exclude anyone.
 
Looks like discussion of the 2 cars seems to upset the binClayden fanclub trolls, so maybe lets look at that.

Theories I've seen so far:

1. Allison meets perp and lover in bush - fight ensues
2. Perp + accomp drive Alli to bridge intending to fake suicide and change mind
3. Perp drives there to dump, has breakdown/flat battery; needs tow home.
4. Perp drives there to dump, calls accomp for help

Any others?

Fight heard near home and phone movement may exclude (1)
Strange car movement (very close; lights off) could indicate towing - why else could cars be doing that?
 
I can accept that there may be people commenting on here who are friends with people who we may speculate on having involvement in Allisons death. I can appreciate how hard that must be, particularly when you believe that person is innocent. However the facts stated BY POLICE do not hint towards this being a random hit and run. They also don't point towards this being about a stranger who attacked her on her walk. It states that it was someone close to Allison. It also states that they believe one or more family/friend cars were involved. The information released should NOT be discounted in preference for some wild theory about international mafia links, or people with DUI convictions. In the end it may come out that those things were connected. However, at this stage those things are not FACT. They are rumour or speculation.

Not MOO.
 
Let's not start out the day by losing posting privileges. If someone asks a question or makes a statement that you don't like and it falls withing our rules, leave them alone.

I'll be back in a minute and will post to explain how you can do something about it. Hold on.
 
543 said:
Can we concentrate a bit on about how Allison's phone is missing. Surely, a phone is missing because it fell, was thrown, was stolen, or something else. Now, why, oh why would it be left on?
This is a SUPER CRITICAL point that keeps the husband out of it & I'm pretty positive that QPS thinks exactly the same thing as I do. So how about all of us put our theories forward to help them out....because some of you are really very clever.
The phone: Was still on, not in water, was in the area of Brookfield/Pullenvale. So, my theory is that it fell when she had been tackled or run over and that the person who did that to her didn't even notice that she had a phone on her....probably he went back to look for it and can't find it either. So, if you see a car stopping at the side of the road looking for something or someone in a park looking for something....could be the person you're looking for and near the spot where Allison went missing/was run over on her walk!
The missing phone also discounts any theory of suicide- because the phone would be wet if she jumped from a bridge and would not work...........& I'd like to see what forensics come up with!!
Click to expand...

Thinking about this a bit more... I'm actually a bit concerned. I hope what I'm saying comes across as intended.
Because you are putting so much emphasis on WHERE the phone is... and really I can't see a reason why the location would exclude anyone... UNLESS the person who had it was to plant it somewhere else to make it look like someone else has done it and not them?? I know this is far fetched... but I would hate to think that the killer would try to make someone else look guilty.
Otherwise, I do not understand why you are so fixed on them finding it and clearing GBC. Ofcourse it would be great to find it, as long as it isn't found somewhere that takes away from the real killer. IMO
Gee, I'm really hoping this made sense.
 
YOUR IGNORE LIST AND YOU!​


Any time a group of people get together there are bound to be disagreements. This forum is no exception. We are in no position to tell you what to think of ideas you see expressed here, but in our Terms of Service we do lay out the rules about how you can post here.

If you find that there is a fellow poster whose thoughts you find you are unable to even read without losing your composure, your "Ignore List" is your friend. When you put a poster on this list, the following will happen:

  • You will not see their posts;
  • They will not be able to send you PMs;
  • They will not be able to send you email vial the Board links;
  • They will not be able to leave you visitor messages.

By all means if someone is violating the TOS use the little red triangle to send us an alert. But if you are thinking of sending the staff a PM or email because a certain poster:

  • Will not answer your questions;
  • Will not back up their opinions to your satisfaction;
  • Will not change their mind no matter how obvious things are to everyone else.

Please, consider adding them to your ignore list.

NOTE: Do NOT post a message saying you are doing so, that's a TOS violation by you. Put them on the list and be happy.

Useful links:

FAQ entry on troublesome users

Your Ignore List

Your Privacy Settings

Various other settings you may want to set.

WEBSLEUTHS RULES: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91915"]Best Practices Dealing with your fellow posters - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 
Yes it has been mentioned here in a list from (Keyboredom) which i searched for yesterday and is a great reference to keep handy.I was going to ask them to repost but heres the page of facts and other info based on the jungle drums ....thread2#page37 post905 worth a look
I can't find any reference to that situation re the accident and taking off his shirt in that post. Have I misundertood?
 
Kimster said:
Let's not start out the day by losing posting privileges. If someone asks a question or makes a statement that you don't like and it falls withing our rules, leave them alone.

I'll be back in a minute and will post to explain how you can do something about it. Hold on.
Click to expand...

Thanks Kimster i obviously do not know how to do that within the rules, so any help gratefully accepted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 180 more.
Total: 4,594 (members: 181, guests: 4,413)

Online statistics

Members online
181
Guests online
4,413
Total visitors
4,594
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,377
Messages
17,968,198
Members
228,762
Latest member
genepool48
Back
Top