Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, 43, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 - #8

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Great post "First timer" I agree with virtually everything you say. Especially why would you call police if your partner was only about an hour late home.
Interesting re sniffer dogs, did they use them at all immediately?
 
:moo:
With all respect to every one and a big believer in freedom of opinion, but having read a number of posts this morning I am getting a little uncomfortable about this forum being used to discuss how and where the girls need to be cared for, where they should go to school etc etc. this is not related to he case, and IMHO a personal matter for those that will have the legal responsibility of caring for them. Yes, they are the victims, but their privacy should not be invaded because they are. Imagine some people on a website publicly discussing how your kids should be looked after and where they should go to school.

I understand you probably have the best of intentions (honestly), but really this is a place for discussing the case at hand (and at times lightening each others sad thoughts about this with some well directed humour).

Keep sleuthing!:twocents:
 
FirstTimer said:
Hi all,

First time posting and following this from the start.

Brookfield is a rural oasis close to Brisbane city, very few street lights and very few footpaths. Would you let your partner go for a walk a 10pm in those conditions?

Would you not notice your spouse was not in bed all night if she had not returned?

Would you then say that your spouse had gone for a walk in the morning at 6am and then report her missing after 90 minutes at 7.30am?

If your spouse had not returned from a walk wouldn't the first thing you do would be to get in the car and try and look for her? Rather than call the Police.

Wouldn't the police bring in sniffer dogs so early on to follow a trail that was not that cold, not even 12 hours?

If sniffer dogs were brought in, did they make it out of the property following a trail or not.

Why would you lawyer up on day one?

Why would those lawyers then feel the need to hire a top notch barrister?

GBC will not win any acting awards for his first appearance on the news.

Why does 90% of anyone seeing anything to do with this case feel the same way, that GBC is guilty?

Why would you enter the funeral of your wife through a side entrance like a coward?

And look at the photos of outside of the funeral he uses the three girls as a shield for protection.

I can go on and on.

Having watched the unfolding of this tragedy I have gone from GBC being guilty to not guilty and back again. However, if he did not do this to Allison, then who did? The QPS are not worried about someone stalking people in Brookfield. Is there any other indication by QPS of it being someone else? The BCs are giving the impression that they are above the law, above suspiscion all because of their name.

We have to have faith in the QPS that they are building the best possible case they can. That includes finding evidence and facts that point toward the killer, but it also means that they have to rule out anything that could possibly cast doubt in the mind of a jury, which in my mind is harder to do because you have to think about what the lawyers will pick up on and exploit. Remember a lawyer only has to raise the thought of a doubt in any of the jurors mind and he will get off.

I hope for the three girls that GBC is not the one, because they do not deserve to lose both parents, that should not be imposed on any child. But.......

Only time will tell and we all need the patience and resolve that the QPS will get the person or persons responsible. Frustrating as hell I know.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Hi. You make some very good points there. Re whether or not she did go for a walk etc is largely a part of different reportings.
But, the part about the sniffer dogs, you are right. why weren't they brought in? Something tells me that the police felt they didn't need to.. maybe because of something they saw/heard when they first went into the house that morning.

It's also been said that they may have been seperated under one roof, and that they may not have slept in the same room... then he would not know when she went to bed. As for not knowing she was missing til morning {if they were sharing a bed}... this is possible. My daughters husband sleeps so soundly from the moment his head hits the pillow til his alarm goes off. She said that if she wasn't in bed he would be none the wiser.
Having said this, I don't think anything happened as GBC has said. I was just saying a few of the things are possible, but I doubt it in this case.

I am hoping that it is a solid case, and that even a top notch barrister can not get the guilty off. Here's hoping, hey?

Thankyou for your interesting post. :)
 
Bayside said:
spratsmum



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayside
There is one in Carina too, there used to be a scout hall there and they pulled it down and built a few houses.

remember the Scout Hall, lived in the street behind

(had to copy and paste it here as that thread is closed now)

My family lived in that area too, did you go to little Mayfield School?
Such a great little school, wish there were more like them around.
Click to expand...

No I didn't went to St Martins and then San Sisto, live very close noew to Mayfield School though, Mayfield I think is well kept secret, wonderful grounds!!

What a small world this is!!
 
kiwi50 said:
Great post "First timer" I agree with virtually everything you say. Especially why would you call police if your partner was only about an hour late home.
Interesting re sniffer dogs, did they use them at all immediately?
Click to expand...

I do not recall the sniffer dogs being reported as being used at all. However, the thorough job that the QPS have been doing I would have thought they would have brought them. But, like you say was there a need to bring them in at all after the Police were first at the house? Did they see something that led them on the track of a murder investigation in conjunction of a missing persons case straight away?

Am I right in thinking that if a person is missing the police will not respond for 24 hours in case the person turns up? Or is that too much TV? Anyone?

If that is the case, then the police certainly knew something from the very first moments on April 20.

Cheers.
 
minni said:
that is a good point......perhaps the sleepover had nothing to do with work commitments, if indeed there was a sleepover (I still don't think its really confirmed)
Click to expand...

In all probability ABC probably took them to the sleep out in order in anticipation of going home to have a discussion with GBC that she didn't want the children to witness.
 
mouse detective said:
Sleepover confirmation in todays newspaper may be inaccurate reporting. However assuming it is correct and that GBC and ABC were estranged, the obvious sleepover location for 3 children on a school night, would have been with him. What a perfect night for his (ex)wife to vanish - especially if there is a cast iron alibi for the whereabouts of both GBC and his new partner. The declaration by GBC's sister, that ABC was depressed fits with the story that Allison may have wandered off and taken her own life somewhere hence his belief a search would prove fruit-less. How fortuitous was it that her body was found. Just sharing a few possibilities
Click to expand...

Morning all. I give the most credence to Alison Sandy's reports as she seems to have worked so directly with the Dickies. A few of the others seem to sensationalize or misreport things, but I reckon Alison is pretty top notch.
 
oreily85 said:
Ok this is bugging me.. Sorry if it's been asked, I haven't seen it if it has... For someone who gave up her career ( which was??) she seems to work a lot. Why would you give up your career then work anyway?

I Didn't think ppl who gave up careers needed to attend all day conferences which require the kids sleeping somewhere else on a school night?

Just confused is all...
Click to expand...

I believe she gave up her career to raise the children, however, if we go by the rumour that there was serious trouble in the marriage, she may have been planning for sometime the need to return to work to support her girls after an eventual divorce. These things don't normally happen overnight. It took me a whole year to decide to leave my ex-husband and plan my return to work accordingly.
 
linette said:
It's also been said that they may have been seperated under one roof, and that they may not have slept in the same room... then he would not know when she went to bed.
Click to expand...

Thanks Linette.

Sleeping separately under one roof I am not sure, GBC too proud to have his "image" tarnished to friends and family to worry about one of his kids letting it slip that 'mommy and daddy sleep in different bedrooms'. WHOOPS.

Again just thoughts and specualtion, which is all we have at this stage.

Cheers.
 
laserdisc10 said:
Should be 'possibly 5 involved'. But this did not come from the police as far as I'm aware

You're correct in what you say of course. There's been no mention of searches conducted on others. May have been, but nothing about it in the media that I could find
Click to expand...

Only BC cars were searched as far as we know, but BC Seniors house was raided, computers taken etc also. And GBC offices were raided too which may potentially implicate others I guess.
 
LostSock said:
In all probability ABC probably took them to the sleep out in order in anticipation of going home to have a discussion with GBC that she didn't want the children to witness.
Click to expand...

I have thought the same thing.
 
FirstTimer said:
I do not recall the sniffer dogs being reported as being used at all. However, the thorough job that the QPS have been doing I would have thought they would have brought them. But, like you say was there a need to bring them in at all after the Police were first at the house? Did they see something that led them on the track of a murder investigation in conjunction of a missing persons case straight away?

Am I right in thinking that if a person is missing the police will not respond for 24 hours in case the person turns up? Or is that too much TV? Anyone?

If that is the case, then the police certainly knew something from the very first moments on April 20.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

There is no time limit to report someone missing if you seriously fear for their welfare.
 
Once again.....Why would someone leave a phone on and let it be triangulated? He didn't kill his wife! He's probably been getting threats of all sorts and on top of that, he's got to look after their 3 kids and deal with the fact that his wife has been murdered and he's copping the blame.
Think about the phone!! Why was it still on? It probably went flying when she was hit by a car or if not...it went flying when she was tackled! Did it go down a steep embankment?
 
Willowwind said:
Ok sleuths (theorists)....Some yes and no answers please...

Premeditated means the killer would have planned this. Was this a planned attack?
Was there more than 2 people including the killer who will be charged?
Was the lawyer at the house when the police arrived?
Does the trailer have anything to do with the killer or accomplacie?
Was there already overwheing evidence before the forensics?
Was ABC killed at her own home?
Did the children sleep elsewhere that evening?
Will life insurance be a motive in this case?
Is the roundabout focus on a witness seeing a suspect or accomplacie in the area but not in a car?
Did the killer attend the funeral?
Was the body dumped upstream?
Did Allison go for a walk?
Was death cause by strangulation?
Will an arrest be made this week?
Click to expand...

Hi willow, have a look at all of our previous threads for our answers :)
 
oreily85 said:
The friend confirmed the kids were somewhere else, it's in an article somewhere I'm sure.
Click to expand...

A Courier Mail article posted last night has a one liner indicating the girls were at a sleepover on Thursday night.
 
:wagon: FirstTimer!

FirstTimer said:
Hi all,

First time posting and following this from the start.

Brookfield is a rural oasis close to Brisbane city, very few street lights and very few footpaths. Would you let your partner go for a walk a 10pm in those conditions?

Would you not notice your spouse was not in bed all night if she had not returned?

Would you then say that your spouse had gone for a walk in the morning at 6am and then report her missing after 90 minutes at 7.30am?

If your spouse had not returned from a walk wouldn't the first thing you do would be to get in the car and try and look for her? Rather than call the Police.

Wouldn't the police bring in sniffer dogs so early on to follow a trail that was not that cold, not even 12 hours?

If sniffer dogs were brought in, did they make it out of the property following a trail or not.

Why would you lawyer up on day one?

Why would those lawyers then feel the need to hire a top notch barrister?

GBC will not win any acting awards for his first appearance on the news.

Why does 90% of anyone seeing anything to do with this case feel the same way, that GBC is guilty?

Why would you enter the funeral of your wife through a side entrance like a coward?

And look at the photos of outside of the funeral he uses the three girls as a shield for protection.

I can go on and on.

Having watched the unfolding of this tragedy I have gone from GBC being guilty to not guilty and back again. However, if he did not do this to Allison, then who did? The QPS are not worried about someone stalking people in Brookfield. Is there any other indication by QPS of it being someone else? The BCs are giving the impression that they are above the law, above suspiscion all because of their name.

We have to have faith in the QPS that they are building the best possible case they can. That includes finding evidence and facts that point toward the killer, but it also means that they have to rule out anything that could possibly cast doubt in the mind of a jury, which in my mind is harder to do because you have to think about what the lawyers will pick up on and exploit. Remember a lawyer only has to raise the thought of a doubt in any of the jurors mind and he will get off.

I hope for the three girls that GBC is not the one, because they do not deserve to lose both parents, that should not be imposed on any child. But.......

Only time will tell and we all need the patience and resolve that the QPS will get the person or persons responsible. Frustrating as hell I know.

Cheers.
Click to expand...
 
FirstTimer said:
I do not recall the sniffer dogs being reported as being used at all. However, the thorough job that the QPS have been doing I would have thought they would have brought them. But, like you say was there a need to bring them in at all after the Police were first at the house? Did they see something that led them on the track of a murder investigation in conjunction of a missing persons case straight away?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Perhaps nothing seemed to make sense to the police that first morning, therefore they became suspicious straight away?
In alot of cases where an adult has gone missing, they plead with them to make contact... whereas in this case it seemed to ramp up fairly quickly, didn't it?
 
A few degrees of seperation ..... run a TM google image search ....first image ........ 2010 Libertine Parfumerie West End launch ........

I’m sure both the ‘Tahitian Prince’ and Libertine Parfumerie where mentioned in the one breath more than a few times in the earlier months this year .........

And then do another serach .... Flight Centre / Libertine The flight centre lists a visit to the Libertine as a thing to put on your must do list when in Brissy Really a Parfumerie visit 'a must do' on a trip to Brissy , who is kidding who there ............. Brissy is still such a small town really
 
I wondered about that too.They said that the first response Police attended a missing person report and ABC's car was at the show grounds. Those Police observed something which caused Detectives to become involved etc etc. I wondered if what they observed was sniffer dogs indicating on ABC's car. I haven't read anywhere there were police dogs involved but it could be the case in a missing person case given the terain in the area. They would definately get the dog to sniff the vehicle first with the expectation ABC walked away from the vehicle presenting the dog with a trail to follow. If she didn't walk from the vehicle no trail for the dog. Police go hmmmmm why is dog sniffing that person standing there. Just one more theory to add to the mix....
 
spratsmum said:
No I didn't went to St Martins and then San Sisto, live very close noew to Mayfield School though, Mayfield I think is well kept secret, wonderful grounds!!

What a small world this is!!
Click to expand...

Oh yes it is smaller than we think sometimes lol. We lived in Breslin St when I was young then I went to live with my grandparents. My brother stayed in Breslin St and went to Mayfield and then we purchased the house after we had children and sent them to Mayfield.

It is strange how they shoved those new houses in Bayden Powel Pl, they look out of place with the area.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 228 more.
Total: 3,587 (members: 229, guests: 3,358)

Online statistics

Members online
229
Guests online
3,358
Total visitors
3,587
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,703
Messages
17,957,803
Members
228,591
Latest member
44Tejas1821
Back
Top