Gerard Baden Clay's murder appeal

[JLZ]

But, it still remains that he chose to have Allison's body placed under the bridge (14 kms away) instead of calling an Ambulance .....WHY Oh WHY!

A Judge deciding on a sentence would surely take this into account, and come to the conclusion that Gerard's action in deciding to 'save his own skin' rather than seek help for his Wife was reprehensible to say the least ...... after all, it wasn't that he was choosing not to rescue her from another threat!

In my opinion, it was reasonable for the jury to conclude that if Gerard didn't have the intention to kill during the fight, he surely formed the intention afterwards. He couldn't be certain Allison was unrevivable, but by putting her under the bridge he made it near enough to impossible for her to survive.

 

[Fuskier]

But, it still remains that he chose to have Allison's body placed under the bridge (14 kms away) instead of calling an Ambulance .....WHY Oh WHY!

A Judge deciding on a sentence would surely take this into account, and come to the conclusion that Gerard's action in deciding to 'save his own skin' rather than seek help for his Wife was reprehensible to say the least ...... after all, it wasn't that he was choosing not to rescue her from another threat!

Exactly. In the 'hypothetical scenario' that he punched her and she fell and hit her head, he did not ring a doctor/ambulance to get help for her. He was not a doctor. How was he sure she was dead? As JLZ states he put her in the car, drove to the bridge and unceremoniously dumped her there - lessening the chance that she would survive. IMHO he acted with what I call a 'consciousness of guilt' to conceal her death and conceal his part in her death.

There were several 'hypothetical' scenarios floating around then:
First of all, she hypothetically swallowed a packet of antidepressants and jumped off a bridge or fell down a hole. Then, hypothetically, she went for a walk and may have been abducted/murdered by a stranger or left home to go to a friends house. So much misleading. All that time he knew where she was and what had happened to her. He caused much distress to her loved ones, her friends, colleagues, neighbors and thousands of dollars in unnecessary search & rescue logistics expenditure. What about her phone? What did he do with that? At no stage did he admit to the police that he had been involved in her death.

Again, domestic violence/no witnesses.

This use of a hypothetical 'panic' angle in interpreting his 'hypothetical' actions after her death - I find disturbing.
He had admitted nothing.

My honest opinion only.

 

[Couldbe]

IMO this verdict has been downgraded on appeal on the basis of 'hypothetical scenarios' about what could have happened - without any admission from Gerard Baden-Clay?

I'm not a legal person, but I'm struggling with this one.

Generally, in science, a hypothesis is an idea not yet proven, but leads to further discussion; it usually precedes the development of a theory. But theory is just that - a theory (general propositions used to explain phenomena) yet to be proved and validated by evidence.

So true ..... my thoughts have been where would some hypothetical scenarios end when you put your mind them; but I guess the parameters of the Trial outcomes govern the possibilities.

Just depends where they wish to put their legal emphasis and what they wish to use to support it? Sure baffles the majority of us.
Meanwhile, regardless of the truth, the case is fitted into the cracks.

 

[Wolfinator]

Just want to give a shout out to our LE agencies who did an amazing job under difficult circumstances.

So hard to swallow. You catch the crook. Nurse the family through a harrowing time. Are lied to, fed red herrings etc etc. and then our courts do this.

I am thankful every day for our police force who continue to turn up and do what would often feel like a thankless task.

I understand the legal rigmarole - gratitude to our legal eagle sleuthers - but GBC is so vile that it's the sentiment of this down grade that bothers me .... "See girls - I didn't mean to hurt your mother.. " Maybe just a "little bit" Gerard....

Gutted!!!


IMO

 

[Fuskier]

FYI

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/com...nt-in-appeal-for-freedom-20150826-gj8ksh.html

How can he argue now - as part of his appeal - that he might have unintentionally killed his wife Allison, when he swore black and blue, at his trial only a year ago, that he did not?

Just rewind a year... questions Baden-Clay was asked, under Oath, by his lawyer Michael Byrne 14 months ago:

Did you kill your wife Allison?
"No I did not," Baden-Clay said.

"Did you fight with her on the evening of the 19th (of April 2012)?"
"No I did not," he answered.

I agree with Madonna King. This downgrade for Gerard Baden-Clay shows why we must reform our judicial system.

 

[Wolfinator]

Sorry if this has already been posted but how about making a rule that man slaughter is not an option if you hide a body in panic after an accidental/unintentional death - it is considered murder regardless of intent!!!


IMO

 

[JLZ]

Sorry if this has already been posted but how about making a rule that man slaughter is not an option if you hide a body in panic after an accidental/unintentional death - it is considered murder regardless of intent!!!

IMO

With respect, no, I think it is worthwhile having a separate category of crime for intentional killing.

Increasing the maximum possible sentence for manslaughter is another question; but presumably you'd want to reconsider murder sentencing at the same time.

 

[Fuskier]

I have just witnessed today the legal use of 'rationalizations' and 'hypotheticals' to downgrade a conviction of murder.

 

[Wolfinator]

With respect, no, I think it is worthwhile having a separate category of crime for intentional killing.

Increasing the maximum possible sentence for manslaughter is another question; but presumably you'd want to reconsider murder sentencing at the same time.

Cooler heads prevail. Thanks JLZ.


IMO

 

[Froglady]

This came on the tv
while I was in a waiting room and I couldn't help but yell out BS. Needless to say everyone stared at me but I don't care. He is repulsive!

 

[Amee]

Acting Attorney-General Cameron Dick announces he may look into appealing the decision in Gerard Baden-Clay's new manslaughter conviction as the previously convicted murderer prepares to be re-sentenced in the new year.

In Queensland the charge of manslaughter typically attracts a sentence of eight to 12 years.

In a statement by Acting Attorney-General Cameron Dick he stated "I have requested legal advice today about the prospects of success on an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal involving Gerard Baden-Clay."
"Once that advice has been received and considered, a decision will be made as to whether an appeal should be lodged. The Attorney-General must make a decision on any possible appeal within 28 days."


https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3030301...ction-downgraded-from-murder-to-manslaughter/

 

[JCB]

Acting Attorney-General Cameron Dick announces he may look into appealing the decision in Gerard Baden-Clay's new manslaughter conviction as the previously convicted murderer prepares to be re-sentenced in the new year.

In Queensland the charge of manslaughter typically attracts a sentence of eight to 12 years.

In a statement by Acting Attorney-General Cameron Dick he stated "I have requested legal advice today about the prospects of success on an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal involving Gerard Baden-Clay."
"Once that advice has been received and considered, a decision will be made as to whether an appeal should be lodged. The Attorney-General must make a decision on any possible appeal within 28 days."


https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3030301...ction-downgraded-from-murder-to-manslaughter/

There are no grounds for appeal which would have any prospect of success. It's not going to happen. I know politicians have to make statements when addressing matters that are in the public interest but it's just creating false hope unfortunately

 

[SapphireSteel]

Just popping in to ponder if Qld prisons are nice places...hope not...

 

[JLZ]

at least, and its not much but at least this appeal has not gone down the road of jury error, .. nothing is imputed or inferred that the jury has made an error in conclusion, or adjudicating. But it must make people wonder why in hell they bother to do jury service.. why would you forgo weeks of wages, your own personal freedom to be enclosed with strangers for weeks, . and... then have the responsibility to form a verdict, which the entire population waits upon, which has to be absolutely accurate and crystal clear, for nothing?

just...nothing. ... .you can do all this and it makes not a jot of difference.

I disagree with the bolded, Trooper. The ground of appeal which succeeded was that the verdict was unreasonable. See paragraph 48,
"the jury could not properly have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the element of intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm had been proved." http://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2015/QCA15-265.pdf (And I disagree with the judges, at least until I've thought about it some more.)

 

[they'll get you]

Could someone enlighten me please? How did Allison die?

Did he hold a pillow over her face until she wasn't breathing or did he hit her and knock her out?

Either way, Allison may have died when she was dropped over the bridge into the mud.
Can't see past murder I'm sorry.

I see this opening an avalanche of 'I didn't mean it' murderers.


Forensic pathologists could not determine the cause of her death, but prosecutors suggested Baden-Clay smothered his wife to death while their daughters slept soundly in their beds.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ng-wife-allison-badenclay-20140715-ztdon.html


It could not be ruled out that there was a physical confrontation in which Allison fell and hit her head, the ruling by Chief Justice Catherine Holmes,
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-08/gerard-baden-clay-wins-appeal/7009464

 

[they'll get you]

How can we possibly say Rest in Peace Allison?

 

[JLZ]

Could someone enlighten me please? How did Allison die?

Did he hold a pillow over her face until she wasn't breathing or did he hit her and knock her out?

Either way, Allison may have died when she was dropped over the bridge into the mud.
Can't see past murder I'm sorry.

I see this opening an avalanche of 'I didn't mean it' murderers.


Forensic pathologists could not determine the cause of her death, but prosecutors suggested Baden-Clay smothered his wife to death while their daughters slept soundly in their beds.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ng-wife-allison-badenclay-20140715-ztdon.html


It could not be ruled out that there was a physical confrontation in which Allison fell and hit her head, the ruling by Chief Justice Catherine Holmes,
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-08/gerard-baden-clay-wins-appeal/7009464

The exact cause of death could not be established by the post-mortem pathologist.

"The state of putrefaction and mummification was such as to obscure any injuries which had been sustained."

"Dr Milne did not think Mrs Baden-Clay had died from natural causes, because there was no sign of any natural disease, but he could not establish the cause of death."

paragraphs 9-11, http://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2015/QCA15-265.pdf

 

[Wolfinator]

So the interfering with corpse charge will still stand? Any chance the sentence for this and manslaughter will be served separately not concurrently?

8-12 manslaughter
2 years interference with corpse
No parole


IMO

 

[Trooper]

I disagree with the bolded, Trooper. The ground of appeal which succeeded was that the verdict was unreasonable. See paragraph 48,
"the jury could not properly have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the element of intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm had been proved." http://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2015/QCA15-265.pdf (And I disagree with the judges, at least until I've thought about it some more.)

:naughty: just a darn minute, there, JLZ.... the jury's verdict was reasonable in the light of evidence presented, allied with the testimony of the accused. It wasn't the verdict the jury in all integrity gave that is unreasonable. . the judges of the appeal are saying that the interpretation of the facts they were called upon to cast a verdict were dicey.. ..

Appeals judges cannot possibly rule on the thought processes and mindsets of any jury.. it just isn't done, because ,, the obvious response to this claim is, the jury found him guilty of murder. It was unanimous, which pre supposes that the jury , understanding the difference between murder and manslaughter, agreed that the element of intent was not only present, but was supported by corroborating evidence..

the very verdict underlines the fact that the jury WERE indeed satisfied, properly satisfied beyond a shadow of doubt. Other wise it would have been a hung jury or a dismissed jury. It wasn't .

but we could go round and round about this forever.. right now, its too horrid to even dwell on.

 

[Mumma Bear]

So the interfering with corpse charge will still stand? Any chance the sentence for this and manslaughter will be served separately not concurrently?

8-12 manslaughter
2 years interference with corpse
No parole


IMO

And can we add perjury to that - maximum of 14 years. Served consecutively. Justice for his extra roll of the dice.