The Crown v Gerard Baden-Clay, 9th July - Trial Day 17

[Aunty]

I was there too Aunty. It was interesting moment. Gave me a fright at the time. I hadn't considered your take on it.

Did you see the way the person sitting on it , lent forward till he was staring at the table, as if in some kind of daze? Slowly moving?
(Like a very slow moving rocking chair). :HHJP:

 

[Mr Marple]

Did you see the way the person sitting on it , lent forward till he was staring at the table, as if in some kind of daze? Slowly moving?

Yes I did. He seemed quite stunned. I didn't think anything of it at the time other than a bit of a shock from the chair breaking him. But you've got me wondering now.

 

[alioop]

Haha I said high probability (85% - 90 %) NOT certainty..... noone can ever be certain (100%)

Even though we were joking about ducks, the whole concept of exactly what beyond reasonable doubt means is a grey area. The judge will not give a definition of it to the jury. The jury are supposed to work out what it means. Some learned legal people have written papers on it and suggest it is around at least 85% certain. In some jurisdictions outside Australia the jury are told they have to be sure the person is guilty. I really think it should be defined by legislation so the jury are very clear as to what it means. It is such an important legal standard that it should be defined.
Todd Fullers description of it is the best I have heard and was very practical in that we all make decisions beyond a reasonable doubt every day.

2.46pm


Well, well well! Signs were coming in loud and clear today.

Also at 2.46pm today in the main court room,
I was watching ... just as that chair broke ! :HHJP:
What I saw though, was very very weird and I noted that the person sitting on it ...thought the same.
Whats remarkable, is that chair was front and centre.
The person moved out of it and the chair remained empty... whilst the court proceeded.
It was as if the chair was cleared for Allison.
What was being presented ... was exexexextremely important.
You will understand why , when you go back and read the 2.46pm to 2.47 pm posts. (Page23)
I think this is what "broke the camels back" :thud:

Wow, now you are giving me the heebie jebbies. But there is no denying the 2.46 pm posts. And as soon as the caterpillar fell on me, I thought it was freaky and we eyeballed each other. I think it was relieved to land on something soft! It was on the left side of my neck too. I was on ws at the time and I posted immediately. I have always believed the caterpillar story at the cross country as you couldn't make that up!

 

[Freya1977]

I was there too Aunty. It was interesting moment. Gave me a fright at the time. I hadn't considered your take on it.

Hmm I think the main court was filled with Web Sleuths today...

 

[kiwijayne]

I don't think so KJ. Why?

No reason

 

[Aunty]

Even though we were joking about ducks, the whole concept of exactly what beyond reasonable doubt means is a grey area. The judge will not give a definition of it to the jury. The jury are supposed to work out what it means. Some learned legal people have written papers on it and suggest it is around at least 85% certain. In some jurisdictions outside Australia the jury are told they have to be sure the person is guilty. I really think it should be defined by legislation so the jury are very clear as to what it means. It is such an important legal standard that it should be defined.
Todd Fullers description of it is the best I have heard and was very practical in that we all make decisions beyond a reasonable doubt every day.



Wow, now you are giving me the heebie jebbies. But there is no denying the 2.46 pm posts. And as soon as the caterpillar fell on me, I thought it was freaky and we eyeballed each other. I think it was relieved to land on something soft! It was on the left side of my neck too. I was on ws at the time and I posted immediately. I have always believed the caterpillar story at the cross country as you couldn't make that up!

I am so glad that we have been able to give these signs our attention and affirm them too. Yay! Keep up the great work!
All here for Allison to be acknowledged and the truth to be heard.

 

[alioop]

Now I have a possum above me in my ceiling. I think it's just a sign of a cold possum enjoying the comforts and warmth of my ceiling. But if something else gets posted at the same time, I am open to suggestions!

 

[Aunty]

fftobed: ha ha, I can take your possum with me ...

 

[alioop]

Aunty we both posted at 11.54.

edit. I am taking that as a sign we need to go to bed!

 

[BJsleuth]

Now I have a possum above me in my ceiling. I think it's just a sign of a cold possum enjoying the comforts and warmth of my ceiling. But if something else gets posted at the same time, I am open to suggestions!

Where is Possumheart?

 

[Susan12]

Todd Fullers description of it is the best I have heard and was very practical in that we all make decisions beyond a reasonable doubt every day.

How did he describe it exactly, do you or anyone know his words? Thanks!

 

[alioop]

Where is Possumheart?

Hopefully not snoring in my ceiling!

 

[Mr Marple]

Did you see the way the person sitting on it , lent forward till he was staring at the table, as if in some kind of daze? Slowly moving?
(Like a very slow moving rocking chair). :HHJP:

Imagine if it had been Gerard's chair that broke.

 

[alioop]

How did he describe it exactly, do you or anyone know his words? Thanks!

Susan this is the tweet that got me thinking.

David Murray ‏@TheMurrayD 1m
You make assessments of people every day, you decide beyond reasonable doubt every day - Fuller #badenclay

 

[Fluffykins]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-allison-in-2012/story-fnihsrf2-1226982264933

:heartbeat::heartluv::heartbeat: Ooh yeah :heartbeat::heartluv::heartbeat:

 

[marlywings]

How did he describe it exactly, do you or anyone know his words? Thanks!

Fuller says the jurors are participating in a process to determine whether Gerard killed his wife.

Fuller: And if he did it with an intention to kill her.

Fuller says it's not about the mechanisms, it's about whether they are satisfied he did it.

Fuller says we make assessments of people every day.
Fuller says they apply their experiences, their knowledge of that person to make those decisions.
You make assessments of people every day, you decide beyond reasonable doubt every day -

Fuller Do you trust your doctor or follow the treatment they provide -

Fuller says a courtroom is an unofficial environment. They can't have a relationship with any of the people who come before them.

Fuller says they are restricted to what people say in the courtroom and how they say it.
This is different in that you are banned from having any knowledge of the people being assessed -

Fuller says on the surface, the Baden-Clays appeared to be a perfect couple. But it was just a facade. #badenclay

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...E-LINKS-NO-DISCUSSION&p=10718883#post10718883

 

[KG1]

Awesome posts FigTree. Thank you for all your time and effort in posting all the tweets and giving us a great summary of the day. Also lots of thanks to all who were in court and kept us informed of happenings, and gave us amusing quips to lighten the enormity of this case. Big day tomorrow - and then the wait for a verdict. As an aside, I thought it was telling when one of our 'court reporters' related that the jury members were not taking any notes during Judge Byrne's summation. Maybe they already know their decision. (Or maybe they were told not to take notes as they would be provided with everything in the jury room).

 

[jens]

With all those leaves around the house and patio I think there would have been leaves in the car anyway.

So maybe the fact that there weren't any leaves in the car is more telling! That is, it had been cleaned out!

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

:heartbeat::heartluv::heartbeat: Ooh yeah :heartbeat::heartluv::heartbeat:

Wonder if Mr TF knows there is a big fanclub for him on WS?:floorlaugh:

 

[Insp.Gadget]

Respect, peace and love for Allison Baden-Clay and her Children!
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/07/09/07/36/baden-clay-jury-to-hear-final-arguments

This is a horrofying Fact about Domestic Violence and Gender gap:

• Female homicide victims are 2.5 times more likely, than male victims to be killed
by someone with whom they are in a domestic relationship.
http://www.women.nsw.gov.au/women_i...nd_households/1.3_domestic_violence_homicide*


"Contrary to public perceptions that we are most at risk of beingmurdered by a stranger, homicides in Australia and elsewhereare
most likely to involve persons who are known to each other"
http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi2/tandi255.pdf