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

[Inspector]

I was reliably told that they had to get big g first then lay new charge so as to not complicate gbc trial . lets face it they can charge him whenever they like there is no statute of limitation

Very interesting! Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

[Trooper]

One thing that can only be of benefit to the Baden-Clays,. ...they have had the chance to see real aristocracy right in front of their very eyes, in Mr T. Fuller QC.. really educated, not fake, really qualified, not fake, really straight and not bent, really analytical and not fake , really respected and deserving of it by not faking a life , really the real thing, and not invented..

it may help them in the years to come..

 

[squizzey1]

Maybe if you want to charge someone with accessory to murder, you have to first prove the murder has occurred?
No idea really but if there's more charges to come you can bet your bottom dollar people are being closely observed.

that's my point in my post , you explained it better thanks T

 

[frustrated detective]

Yes, guilty for me, too. I said so even before GBC got on the stand.

 

[Fluffykins]

David Murray ‏@TheMurrayD 1m
Jumper around Allison's head could have been moved there before or after death - Justice Byrne

Do you think he pulled it up so he didn't have to see her face ?

I think he must have done. It has been suggested it may have worked its way up as he was dragging her along the ground, but that would probably only have happened at the back. For her arms to have been crossed over in front of her face with the jumper pulled up over them suggests her face was deliberately covered.

 

[JCB]

Me again The man many of you love to hate!

Kidding aside, while my opinion on the likely verdict hasn't changed, if he is indeed convicted I will say that I will lose no sleep over it whatsoever. Furthermore I was earlier concerned about a potential appealable error but after hearing more, my fears have been allayed. I'd still expect an appeal of course, it is almost inevitable in cases with mandatory life imprisonment but nothing absolutely stands out as reason for worry (in my non verified expert opinion).

I am however particularly concerned with the Crown's failure to adequately address how the blood came to be in the Captiva and the lack of plant material present. It is my (again, non verified expert) belief that the Crown's case becomes defective if they cannot establish that Alison was bundled into the Captiva postmortem and driven out to where she was ultimately discovered. The Crown did not (could not?) offer, at least to me, a reasonable and logical explanation as to how Allison's blood came to be in the car. There were no obvious wounds which would be consistent with what appears to be a not insignificant amount of blood, I guess one could make the argument that it could have been a facial wound which from what I can gather, would have been hard to identify after her discovery but even this possibility was not raised. As for the lack of plant material, the Crown has conceded that there was no evidence of a clean up and offered only the positioning of the toys as "odd".

Given that nobody heard or saw GBC leaving their residence, in transit to KCB, at the scene itself or returning home it must surely mean that Crown relies exclusively on the Captiva evidence which I fear is lacking to the extent that it is likely the undoing of the Crown case.

Quickly before court once again resumes, I have 2 questions that I would invite opinion on.

1. Why was Kholo Creek chosen when there are numerous secluded and rugged areas closer to the BC residence which are accessed along much less heavily trafficed roads? I am not a local but I do know the area fairly well, there are numerous areas within perhaps a 10 minute radius where a body may never even be found. It is odd that he took the chance to travel perhaps twice that distance, along much busier roads.

2. The prosecution alleges that Allison was dragged down an embankment, placed on a ledge and rolled off. Why is this the case when, not 20 metres away, GBC could have stopped the car momentarily on the bridge, removed Allison from the boot and thrown her into the middle of the river which at the time was within an hour either side of high tide and so would have been likely to sweep Allison's body away into the Brisbane River as the tide ebbed, possibly never to be seen again. Not only would this seem (to me) to be the most obvious and efficient method, it would have taken mere seconds whereas physically taking her down the embankment, at least partially, must have taken some minutes (not to mention greatly increasing the chance of GBC dragging some evidence of being in that location back into the car with him). The only possible reason that I can come up with, and I feel like I'm grasping at straws in the context of the evidence, is that he wanted her found which would indicate obvious premeditation and scope for perhaps a harsher penalty than the 15 year minimum which (in my opinion only) would seem likely otherwise.

 

[heloise]

YES! :happydance:

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

Well EBC, if Gerard did not kill Allison, who did? How did she end up at Kholo Creek? How did her blood end up in the Captiva? How did 6 plant samples from the garden at Brookfield house end up in her hair? Who put the phone back on the charger? EBC can't honestly believe that GBC is innocent? Can she????

She could and most probably does. She is his mother!!! She raised him and nothing in her wants to believe that he was capable of murdering anyone. Yes I believe that they have a strong family loyalty and are somewhat snobbish and self righteous. But really they have been thrown into this mire as well. I don't think it helps to add rumor to the stories about his family helping him and being in the know. If they are NOT and were not then they will immediately condemn the media/ for the lies. They will believe that lies are being told about Gerard because lies are being told about them also. Yes their evidence was biased towards making Gerard looking better but they will come unstuck. I sure wouldn't like to be in their shoes!! I just don't think it is helpful to put forth rumor as fact.

I agree.. it is highly probably that she does think he is innocent(unless of course she knows different- but I'm not going to make a judgement on that - She is not the one on trial). I believe even if deep down she thinks otherwise, it is quite possible, because she is his mother (no matter what you think of her), its more than possible she would be in deep denial that her child could do such a thing.Its certainly not the first time a Mothers' love would cause them to believe their child innocent because they simply could not and do not want to contemplate the truth. As I said, not going to make any judgements towards EBC in that effect, just that its possible I believe

 

[Inspector]

I think he must have done. It has been suggested it may have worked its way up as he was dragging her along the ground, but that would probably only have happened at the back. For her arms to have been crossed over in front of her face with the jumper pulled up over them suggests her face was deliberately covered.

I have always contributed the fallen leaves to support G acted alone. The leaves say so much to me. Either A was dragged through them to the car, or they had the altercation in the yard, then G lifted A up and carried her to the car. If it happened inside, this damming leaf evidence could have been non-existent if G carried A to the car.

 

[toe]

I agree.. so many things he jumped the gun on...
But that in itself is abig red flag.. If Allison was only supposed to have gone for a walk, only running a little late..why would you be calling, without first seeing if you could find her. He said he didn't want to be alarmist, but that's exactly what he was doing. You would think only when you have done all things possible- like looking for her yourself and after decent amount of time had passed, then it might be time to call the authorities. But he jumped the gun also on ringing the friends the kids were having sleepover with too- early- before he had contacted Allison's parents, as though he knew she would not be back that night..

He didn't expect the arrival of Police so soon after his phone call, he thought he had more time up his sleeve.

 

[Cattail]

Me again The man many of you love to hate!

Kidding aside, while my opinion on the likely verdict hasn't changed, if he is indeed convicted I will say that I will lose no sleep over it whatsoever. Furthermore I was earlier concerned about a potential appealable error but after hearing my, my fears have been allayed. I'd still expect an appeal of course, it is almost inevitable in cases with mandatory life imprisonment but nothing absolutely stands out as reason for worry (in my non verified expert opinion).

I am particularly concerned with the Crown's failure to adequately address how the blood came to be in the Captiva and the lack of plant material present. It is my (again, non verified expert) belief that the Crown's case becomes defective if they cannot establish that Alison was bundled into the Captiva postmortem and driven out to where she was ultimately discovered. The Crown did not (could not?) offer, at least to me, a reasonable and logical explanation as to how Allison's blood came to be in the car. There were no obvious wounds which would be consistent with what appears to be a not insignificant amount of blood, I guess one could make the argument that it could have been a facial wound which from what I can gather, would have been hard to identify after her discovery but even this possibility was not raised. As for the lack of plant material, the Crown has conceded that there was no evidence of a clean up and offered only the positioning of the toys as "odd".

Given that nobody heard or saw GBC leaving their residence, in transit to KCB, at the scene itself or returning home it must surely mean that Crown relies exclusively on the Captiva evidence which I fear is lacking to the extent that it is likely the undoing of the Crown case.

Quickly before court once again resumes, I have 2 questions that I would invite opinion on.

1. Why was Kholo Creek chosen when there are numerous secluded and rugged areas closer to the BC residence which are accessed along much less heavily trafficed roads? I am not a local but I do know the area fairly well, there are numerous areas within perhaps a 10 minute radius where a body may never even be found. It is odd that he took the chance to travel perhaps twice that distance, along much busier roads.

2. The prosecution alleges that Alison was dragged down an embankment, placed on a ledge and rolled off. Why is this the case when, not 20 metres away, GBC could have stopped the car momentarily on the bridge, removed Allison from the boot and thrown her into the middle of the river which at the time was within an hour either side of high tide and so would have been likely to sweep Allison's body away into the Brisbane River as the tide ebbed, possibly never to be seen again. Not only would this seem (to me) to be the most obvious and efficient method, it would have taken mere seconds whereas physically taking her down the embankment, at least partially, must have taken some minutes (not to mention greatly increasing the chance of GBC dragging some evidence of being in that location back into the car with him). The only possible reason that I can come up with, and I feel like I'm grasping at straws in the context of the evidence, is that he wanted her found which would indicate obvious premeditation and scope for perhaps a harsher penalty than the 15 year minimum which (in my opinion only) would seem likely otherwise.

Most people here will tell you he wanted her found as he killed her for the money.

I don't think it was planned that way, so I just view it as another puzzle piece that doesn't quite fit.

I don't love to hate you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Crime and punishment]

I can't find whose post it was but a few pages back, Gerard had been reported as saying he thought Allison might have gone and slept at the Brookfield Showgrounds on the night in question. This was a new one for me and I've tried to read everything here (no wonder I haven't read a novel in two years!).

I have tried searching for the post but to no avail :gaah:

I remember someone else saying that they had a hunch about the Brookfield Showgrounds...is there something else about that place? Sleuthers....any thoughts?

 

[Amee]

12:39pm: Mr Baden-Clay is seated in the dock with his hands folded in his lap.

He has shown no emotion.

12:38pm: Justice Byrne has recounted the evidence of forensic pathologist Dr Nathan Milne who conducted a post-mortem examination of Mrs Baden-Clay's body.

He has reminded the jury Dr Milne could not determine a cause of Mrs Baden-Clay's death.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...y-17-week-5-20140709-3bluf.html#ixzz36wSkMWrZ

 

[MRSA]

I just don't get why a second party could traipse around free when they are implicated in such a dastardly crime.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say lack of evidence to lay charges.

 

[Freya1977]

I've given "itsthevibe" my little yellow ticket so she can experience the joy of sitting behind the BCs for the afternoon and now I'm in the Banco court. We're being read the rules. Phones off!! Damn. It's much more comfortable in here, the court 11 is too small and too close to GBC.

 

[spratsmum]

I can't help but think he may've put her in something i.e. tarp or sheet that may've been outside/near patio which may've collected some of the backyard plant matter prior to her placement, put her in the captiva wrapped in that then rolled it down the driveway as to not alert neighbours or kids. May also answer the possible material burn on shoulder/chest area also. JMO

I think he wrapped Allison in a tarp and dragged her down the hill to the car, put her in the car on the tarp and used it again to dispose of her at Kholo Creek.

I was also told by a reliable source, that Nigel would be charged with being an accessory after GBC was found guilty.

I don't think the purple is of any significance, purple and black are often teamed to together on fabric.

 

[Fluffykins]

YES! :happydance:

LOL, yes to what?

 

[Tishy]

Me again The man many of you love to hate!

Kidding aside, while my opinion on the likely verdict hasn't changed, if he is indeed convicted I will say that I will lose no sleep over it whatsoever. Furthermore I was earlier concerned about a potential appealable error but after hearing my, my fears have been allayed. I'd still expect an appeal of course, it is almost inevitable in cases with mandatory life imprisonment but nothing absolutely stands out as reason for worry (in my non verified expert opinion).

I am particularly concerned with the Crown's failure to adequately address how the blood came to be in the Captiva and the lack of plant material present. It is my (again, non verified expert) belief that the Crown's case becomes defective if they cannot establish that Alison was bundled into the Captiva postmortem and driven out to where she was ultimately discovered. The Crown did not (could not?) offer, at least to me, a reasonable and logical explanation as to how Allison's blood came to be in the car. There were no obvious wounds which would be consistent with what appears to be a not insignificant amount of blood, I guess one could make the argument that it could have been a facial wound which from what I can gather, would have been hard to identify after her discovery but even this possibility was not raised. As for the lack of plant material, the Crown has conceded that there was no evidence of a clean up and offered only the positioning of the toys as "odd".

Given that nobody heard or saw GBC leaving their residence, in transit to KCB, at the scene itself or returning home it must surely mean that Crown relies exclusively on the Captiva evidence which I fear is lacking to the extent that it is likely the undoing of the Crown case.

Quickly before court once again resumes, I have 2 questions that I would invite opinion on.

1. Why was Kholo Creek chosen when there are numerous secluded and rugged areas closer to the BC residence which are accessed along much less heavily trafficed roads? I am not a local but I do know the area fairly well, there are numerous areas within perhaps a 10 minute radius where a body may never even be found. It is odd that he took the chance to travel perhaps twice that distance, along much busier roads.

2. The prosecution alleges that Alison was dragged down an embankment, placed on a ledge and rolled off. Why is this the case when, not 20 metres away, GBC could have stopped the car momentarily on the bridge, removed Allison from the boot and thrown her into the middle of the river which at the time was within an hour either side of high tide and so would have been likely to sweep Allison's body away into the Brisbane River as the tide ebbed, possibly never to be seen again. Not only would this seem (to me) to be the most obvious and efficient method, it would have taken mere seconds whereas physically taking her down the embankment, at least partially, must have taken some minutes (not to mention greatly increasing the chance of GBC dragging some evidence of being in that location back into the car with him). The only possible reason that I can come up with, and I feel like I'm grasping at straws in the context of the evidence, is that he wanted her found which would indicate obvious premeditation and scope for perhaps a harsher penalty than the 15 year minimum which (in my opinion only) would seem likely otherwise.

Hi JCB
MOO
1. the choice of Kholo was simply familiarity with the area combined with 2. the knowledge that the body would likely be undiscovered long enough for any forensic evidence to have deteriorated beyond relevance.
Why do you think you're grasping at straws with a premeditation theory? Interested because I'm swaying on that one.

 

[Thinking]

I think if he chose the desperate financial situation, which included personal loans from "friends" it would have become too complex, involving too many people which would complicate things a lot for the jury.
By focusing on the womanising aspect and constantly including the desperate financial situation, I think Mr Fuller showed how self centered Gerard Baden-Clay was, nothing was going to stop his "big spender" self image.
I think it worked, Gerard Baden-Clay was shown as only caring for himself and not what he had done to his childrens future, by his mistresses and mismanagement of everything.
Don't forget his mistresses are people too, he decieved his mistresses, he decieved his wife, etc etc.....he decieved everyone.
To emphasise the affair as the motive was the best way to go - it emcompassed everything.
With a guilty verdict he loses all of the above anyway, and I hope the children's maternal grandparents are raising them.

Yes, and also the PT are claiming that it is the 15 minute session on the Thurs night that may have culminated in the murder - the 15 minute sessions was all about the marriage and affair, not about their dire financial situation. This is why there was more focus on the affair in my opinion - although I do also think they did a pretty good job of outlining the financial desperation of GBC too.

 

[JCB]

I've given "itsthevibe" my little yellow ticket so she can experience the joy of sitting behind the BCs for the afternoon and now I'm in the Banco court. We're being read the rules. Phones off!! Damn. It's much more comfortable in here, the court 11 is too small and too close to GBC.

That's a nice gesture Enjoy ITB, if that's the right term to be using at such a time.