NO BAIL! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#28

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trooper said:
I wonder what name he called himself on his disguised email thingy with the other women who rock n rolled with Gerard??

if he called himself Bruce,.. to Toni... .

what flights of imagination did he pull for the others??
Click to expand...

Dirk Strongfellow?

Blake Forrester

Dr. Steele Harvardman?
 
CaseClosed said:
I think we are all forgetting that the body had severe decomposition after 10-11 days. I have searched for images and it is not pretty! I am pretty sure it would have been very difficult to determine if she had any internal injuries (unless they found a bullet, or maybe stabbing marks sometimes visible on bones).
Click to expand...

No, I haven't forgotten that. Decomposition and potentially being in water can make trauma and other evidence difficult or impossible to detect. My point is just because there are not signs noted in the autopsy externally doesn't mean that the stains in the car didn't come from the death. I think the Mahony was simply being clever wording it in such a way, enough to cause doubt, you know?
 
Mani said:
Until I hear for sure that the blood is Allison's - then the blood could have belonged to the person/s who leased the car before BC IMO
Click to expand...
Didn't the news report say that the blood WAS Allison's, as was a blond hair?
 
I don't know if this has been posted before, but I think it might be interesting:

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminol"]Luminol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Luminol isn't a way of detecting DNA (a particular person's blood) only IF it is blood.
 
Opinionsgalore said:
What if the original blood stain was smaller, but someone tried to wash it ? Would the luminol pick up diluted blood ?


MOO
Click to expand...


I might have a tiny bit of inside information. It appears that GBC, being the meticulous chap that he is, had done some car detailing on the morning of the 20th before he called the police. It appeared that he had cleaned the carpet lining the back of the car. Obviously not well enough though!
 
DrWatson said:
3. While several people have pointed out that GBC is innocent until proven guilty, it would seem that many in here have him marked as guilty with NO presumption of innocence at all. A lot of comments have been made that are quite derogatory, and that could be construed as prejudgement. It would make a juror's task all the more difficult if he or she had read any of these threads. This includes all the comments about his presumed psychological profile and character type - most of those being from people who have never met him.
.
Click to expand...

The presumption of innocence is a legal doctrine that applies to judges and juries in their capacities as tribunals of fact. It's right and proper that they be bound by that doctrine and comply with it. But the general public and individual citizens can, and usually will, presume what they want. Sometimes that's unfair and unreasonably tarnishes the person's reputation. But sometimes the speculation is right on the money. If the person(s) being speculated about feel strongly enough about it they are free to speak out in their defence and/or to take legal action if the speculation is wrong and damaging. Any decent person of average intelligence should be able to understand that they decide the facts as a juror based on the evidence presented to them in court, not on internet scuttlebut. Judges and magistrates are presumably able to do that all the time and they are exposed to at least as much speculation as the rest of us.
 
Jillie said:
....that's why he got Olivia to by out Chemist Warehouse's whole stock of soap-on-a-rope...
Click to expand...

And a jumbo Vaseline.

Can you believe I found out my 18 year old son had travelled to Vietnam and back with a jumbo Vaseline jar in his carry on bag?? Geez! That's the sign of a drug smuggler!
 
Mani said:
You can see a car depending on where the car is in the driveway, as the carport is to the right but driving past that place, it is blink and you miss it. The house comes up quick on that road and because of the bushes acting as a screen along the front fence line, you really only see the view straight down the driveway as you go past. The bushes hide the front garden so it is quite secluded IMO.
Click to expand...

The poster said her friend slowed up and looked up the driveway. She had some connection with the family from memory. The car she saw was in the driveway. I know what you mean about the bushes, but the poster didn't mention the carport. Not saying she did or didn't see anything, only that it's possible, and yes, as you rightly say, depending on where the car was. :)
 
Bobbie Elliott said:
I might have a tiny bit of inside information. It appears that GBC, being the meticulous chap that he is, had done some car detailing on the morning of the 20th before he called the police. It appeared that he had cleaned the carpet lining the back of the car. Obviously not well enough though!
Click to expand...

So the large area picked out by luminol COULD have been spread by washing.
It just seemed like a very large area, and I'm trying (for the sake of Allison) to not see it as massive blood loss, but as a small amount that had spread through dilution.


MOO
 
Opinionsgalore said:
What if the original blood stain was smaller, but someone tried to wash it ? Would the luminol pick up diluted blood ?


MOO
Click to expand...

Very smart assumption my dear, it might look a lot worse than it was.... I hope for poor Allison.
 
BJsleuth said:
"Notwithstanding the scrutiny, the suggestion of me being the prime suspect and the widespread nationwide speculation throughout the community and in the press I remained prioritising the care and support of my children endeavouring to provide stability and structure in an extraordinarily difficult time," the document read.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...lice-allege-20120626-2102n.html#ixzz1ytD4ThLL

This was interesting to me. One of the things I have read and I will link to says that in such cases where the husband has murdered the wife, that the focus is on themself such as " I have to look after the children." etc There were just a few things that struck a cord in the similarities here if GBC did in fact do as alleged.

WARNING, Graphic details included, not for the feint of heart or squeamish.

http://www.albany.edu/scj/jcjpc/vol15is1/Lewis.pdf
Click to expand...

Yes that quote regarding his priorities being his children made me baulk, although I realise it's more his lawyer's words.

Funny where his priorities were the day police found Allison's body, calling the insurance company and starting the claim process. That's real grief hey.
 
Detect said:
The poster said her friend slowed up and looked up the driveway. She had some connection with the family from memory. The car she saw was in the driveway. I know what you mean about the bushes, but the poster didn't mention the carport. Not saying she did or didn't see anything, only that it's possible, and yes, as you rightly say, depending on where the car was. :)
Click to expand...

I'm guessing, also, that when you drive past a friend's place early (around 4.00am) in the morning and the place is alive with person/s loading something into a car with all its doors open (and, presumably the interior car lights on) you may notice, and think "Well, that's odd..."
 
Mani said:
Hi Berry,

I know they have done a luminol test but have they tested that it is Allison's blood is what I am saying, as I keep hearing about luminol - that just tests for the presence of blood. They have not released that it tested positive to Allison's from my knowledge. Yes they say it is Allison's but where is the proof?

To me it is the same as the query, where the children at home or not. Msm kept printing different things but nothing conclusive until the evidence from the bail hearing IMO

Cheers
Click to expand...

Yes 48 min ago. Detectives say it has been confirmed as ABC's blood...
 
DrWatson said:
Oh don't get me wrong - I agree entirely that the case IS compelling. Very!

But your first question is the one that I think maybe more people should be considering - if not GBC, then who? And why?

I can think of a couple of scenarios that I'd rather not post in public, but that would be quite feasible.

And as for GBC's behaviour - couldn't that maybe fit into the category of somebody who is devastated and completely lost?

As I said - don't get me wrong. I'm just suggesting that maybe somebody needs to act as devil's advocate, and ask a lot more of the hard questions...
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, but...
I will not post anything that will help to hide the truth or lead away from the truth.
I think what you are asking us to do , is help a couple of " white collar , over paid, smartie pants " , pick every piece of evidence apart and squash it.
I will not do that.
If you can think of a couple of scenarios , then you can post them!
If you are considering someone other than the accused , then go ahead and post who and why yourself.
You have also asked one of us to play devils advocate? :what: :maddening:

If you can think of a couple of scenarios, but you would rather not post here, then why are you asking us to do it for you?
I feel like you are trying to lead us like fools. " where angels fear to tread"
I am here to ensure Allison gets a voice. And to ensure that nothing stands in the way of truth and justice.

The police have charged a person who is now awaiting a fair trial.
I don't think it is in our best interests ( legally wise) to start sleuthing other people that are not named POI , and moving away from the facts that have been presented to us via MSM.

As I said - don't get me wrong. I'm just suggesting that you act as devil's advocate yourself.
 
LauraMars said:
Yes that quote regarding his priorities being his children made me baulk, although I realise it's more his lawyer's words.

Funny where his priorities were the day police found Allison's body, calling the insurance company and starting the claim process. That's real grief hey.
Click to expand...

Also what he said on the video, the one where he's speaking to a reporter with OW, he says the same thing. Unless the lawyer told him to say that too but still, that kind of implicates him more, you'd think a lawyer would know that.
 
Hawkins said:
The presumption of innocence is a legal doctrine that applies to judges and juries in their capacities as tribunals of fact. It's right and proper that they be bound by that doctrine and comply with it. But the general public and individual citizens can, and usually will, presume what they want. Sometimes that's unfair and unreasonably tarnishes the person's reputation. But sometimes the speculation is right on the money. If the person(s) being speculated about feel strongly enough about it they are free to speak out in their defence and/or to take legal action if the speculation is wrong and damaging. Any decent person of average intelligence should be able to understand that they decide the facts as a juror based on the evidence presented to them in court, not on internet scuttlebut. Judges and magistrates are presumably able to do that all the time and they are exposed to at least as much speculation as the rest of us.
Click to expand...

and that my friend shall henceforth be referred to as a Hawkinism.....:rocker:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 195 more.
Total: 3,428 (members: 196, guests: 3,232)

Online statistics

Members online
196
Guests online
3,232
Total visitors
3,428
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,821
Messages
17,959,611
Members
228,621
Latest member
MaryEllen77
Back
Top