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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kimster

Former Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
58,124
Reaction score
405
Website
www.ufo2001.com
Thank you for joining Websleuths! :welcome3:


Please remember the following when discussing the Allison Baden-Clay case:
Websleuths is a moderated forum. We strive to discuss cases in a friendly environment.

Our rules can be reviewed here: The Rules (PLEASE make sure you know the rules!)


Currently, we are considering Allison's husband to be a suspected person of interest in this case. There is a possible second party involved per MSM and it is okay to discuss that aspect, but please refrain from accusing anyone of murder at this juncture. Speculating is one thing, accusing is another.


Thread 1

Thread 2
Thread 3
Thread 4

Thread 5

Thread 6

Thread 7

Thread 8



REMEMBER: No cutting and pasting of comments from other social or media websites. You may paraphrase and provide a link.

The only social media sites allowed are those belonging to the victim, Gerard Baden-Clay and any named (by law enforcement) POI or Suspect, or site created and devoted to the murder of Allison.


Media/Timeline Reference Thread: CLICK HERE



CHAT ROOM: not for case discussion!




413987-allison-baden-clay.jpg

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2012/05/10/1226352/413987-allison-baden-clay.jpg
 
As i said...not much to add, but i did want to comment about the blue car. I thought at the time of his accident that it was very strange and it has been hovering in my brain ever since. Is that car blue? to me it looks blue. Maybe it is an older model. I think there was a dark blue 2010 model.

It was on loan from a friend. I thought at the time it would have to be a GOOD friend, or family member, given the circumstances, the community gossip (reflected in his sister's defensive comments) and GPS's initial reaction to the call. Not many people would want to be involved.
Now we hear that a blue car may be involved on the actual night of the murder, so i'm more curious than ever to find out the identity of the friend. It may well be that that person is the main perpetrator.
 
Just checking thought might have been shut down:fence:
 
Morning.

Yesterday I metioned that one of the reasons that they might have used two cars to dispose of the body is because the accomplice didn't want to be caught in a car with a dead body in the event they were pulled over. Someone else also suggested that the accomplice would not want their dna in the car.

If this is true it would point to the accomplice being someone outside of the family.
 
Morning.

Yesterday I metioned that one of the reasons that they might have used two cars to dispose of the body is because the accomplice didn't want to be caught in a car with a dead body in the event they were pulled over. Someone else also suggested that the accomplice would not want their dna in the car.

If this is true it would point to the accomplice being someone outside of the family.

Another theory I saw when I was breezing by the posts is that GBC was in one car and Allison in another and they had a fight in that area and things got out of hand right there. In that case, I would assume there would be some forensic evidence in at least one of the cars and that might be what we are waiting on?

But then again, does that tie in with searching both GBC's house and his parent's house? And questioning his ex-co-worker? How would that all tie in to that theory, if at all?
 
Another theory I saw when I was breezing by the posts is that GBC was in one car and Allison in another and they had a fight in that area and things got out of hand right there. In that case, I would assume there would be some forensic evidence in at least one of the cars and that might be what we are waiting on?

But then again, does that tie in with searching both GBC's house and his parent's house? And questioning his ex-co-worker? How would that all tie in to that theory, if at all?

Yeah, it's plausable that Allison was in one of the cars (alive) but I still think the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.

I think the main motive for searching the parents home is because GBC was staying there at the time and they wanted his computer and work documents. It's odd that they looked in the shed, but maybe that is just routine.
 
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.
 
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.

This doc pretty much explains Queensland police powers (ours differ slightly in each State). Queensland has some history of wanting to increase police powers to control pesky hippies and pot smokers, so we have fairly broad historical powers police can use when a 'real' crime is suspected.

http://www.caxton.org.au/pdfs/Police Powers Your Rights.pdf

Section 4 deals with police searches. The summary is they basically only need 'reasonable suspicion' about a crime even without a warrant, as long as their supervisor feels it would stand up to a pitbull barrister in Court. Pages 27 and 28 deal with these details.

PS while it doesn't apply in this case, the officers own broad interpretation of these rights is arguably misused quite a lot here Eg. Young people in pimped out cars in certain regions are often pulled over and their vehicles searched because of 'reasonable suspicion' they might be carrying drugs in the vehicle. (page 34, 4.4) - probably because a 20 yo in cheap car appears unlikely to afford good legal representation. I think the treatment and rigour around searching a middle class conservative would be handled a lot more carefully, which would be the case with the BC house and vehicles.
 
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.

In the state of Qld Police can search without a warrant if the person they are searching and
if the police officer reasonably suspects a person:

(i) has something that may be:

(a) a weapon, knife or explosive the person may not lawfully possess, or another thing that the person is prohibited from possessing under a domestic violence order or an interstate domestic violence order;

(b) an unlawful dangerous drug;

(c) stolen property;

(d) unlawfully obtained property;

(e) tainted property;

(f) evidence of the commission of a seven year imprisonment offence that may be concealed on the person or destroyed;

(g) evidence of the commission of an offence against the Criminal Code, section 469 (Willful damage) that may be concealed on the person or destroyed if, in the circumstances of the offence, the offence is not a seven year imprisonment offence; or

(h) evidence of the commission of an offence against the Summary Offences Act 2005, section 17, 23B or 23C (e.g. possession of a graffiti instrument or selling spray paint to a minor);

(ii) possesses an antique firearm and is not a fit and proper person to be in possession of the firearm because:

(a) of the person’s mental and physical fitness;

(b) a domestic violence order has been made against the person; or

(c) the person has been found guilty of an offence involving the use, carriage, discharge or possession of a weapon;

(iii) has something that may have been used, is being used, is intended to be used, or is primarily designed for use, as an implement of housebreaking, for unlawfully using or stealing a vehicle, or for the administration of a dangerous drug;

I just cut and pasted a little bit...but you can look if you like....

http://www.police.qld.gov.au/rti/published/policies/qpsPolicyProc/srchPersnWoutWarnt.htm

basically you would have to be known to the police for them to come into your house and search...normal law abiding citizens wouldnt need to worry. For an example...if you had a DVO against you...they can come into your house without a warrant....
 

Lol.. I love their wording "(4) The application must be made to a Supreme Court judge if, when entering and searching the place, it is intended to do anything that may cause structural damage to a building." Because tearing off wall panels, ripping up carpet, removing doors, even tearing down ceilings etc. is not 'structural'. I guess you don't wanna annoy a Supreme Court judge unnecessarily ;)
 
...
basically you would have to be known to the police for them to come into your house and search...normal law abiding citizens wouldnt need to worry...

Sorry brizzychick but that's not totally true, a lot comes down to the individual officer and duty supervisor interpretation of what constitutes 'reasonable suspicion'. In low sociodemographic areas the ratio of searches of innocent people would be higher than in the posh suburbs. There's a lot of reasons for this, but definitely just being a Qld law abiding citizen doesn't mean you or your house will never get searched. Just saying. :)
 
Lol.. I love their wording "(4) The application must be made to a Supreme Court judge if, when entering and searching the place, it is intended to do anything that may cause structural damage to a building." Because tearing off wall panels, ripping up carpet, removing doors, even tearing down ceilings etc. is not 'structural'. I guess you don't wanna annoy a Supreme Court judge unnecessarily ;)

Lol Structural = the building frame
 
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.
 
Sorry brizzychick but that's not totally true, a lot comes down to the individual officer and duty supervisor interpretation of what constitutes 'reasonable suspicion'. In low sociodemographic areas the ratio of searches of innocent people would be higher than in the posh suburbs. There's a lot of reasons for this, but definitely just being a Qld law abiding citizen doesn't mean you or your house will never get searched. Just saying. :)

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?
 
In previous thread a member asked about Google image dates...

Map Data : 2012
Street View - Image Date: December 2009 (on lower edge of each image it gives the month it was taken)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
1,905
Total visitors
2,100

Forum statistics

Threads
589,949
Messages
17,928,071
Members
228,012
Latest member
cbisme
Back
Top