NO BAIL! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#30

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 degree above zero here. Still warmer than GBC's heart IMO
 
Even said:
Just found out today that when an iPhone registers itself on a wifi network it immediately connects to the apple push notification servers and sends to the server the ip address of the wireless router they are connected to.

To register on the wifi network the phone must have previously connected to the wifi network and the user saved the network password.

Now this will be the case for GBC, NBC and Allisons iPhone.

What this means is that the QPS can find out from apple when these phones registered on the wifi network at GBC house. For Allisons phone they should be able to find out when Allisons phone last registered on the wifi network by asking apple for the logs. They should also be able to find out when apple was last successful in sending a push notification to Allisons phone. Push notifications are sent out regularly to notify users of an app update.

Even better,fever if NBC had location services turned off, if he was within range of GBC wifi that night, and his phone had previously connected to that wifi this will still have resulted in apple receiving the ip of GBC wifi via NBC phone. Similarly if GBC was within range of NBC wifi that night.

It all hinges on how long apple keeps logs of the ip registrations as iPhones register onto wifi networks.

I really hope the QPS are aware of this and are following up, or have already followed up, with Apple. If anyone has a contact at QPS please run this info past them.

-----------------
http://theiphonewiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=FaceTime

How does Apples (FaceTime) Server know the IP Address of the 2nd (to be called) iPhone*?

Easy, every iPhone registers itself at Apple's push notification server whenever WiFi is available ("calls" Home).
Basic Process:
iPhone detects Wi-Fi Connection
iPhone gets IP address via DHCP (if not set to static in Settings)
iPhone sends a HTTP request to www.apple.com/library/test/success.html
Apple's servers send back a HTML page containing only the word "Success" in the title and body
iPhone knows it is connected to the Internet
iPhone gets iphone-wu.apple.com/7day/v2/latest/lto2.dat to enable a quick GPS fix for Location Services; LTO stands for long-term orbit. This is unrelated to FaceTime.
iPhone contacts the FaceTime server, init.ess.apple.com
iPhone downloads EVIntl-aia.verisign.com/EVIntl2006.cer
iPhone joins Apple's Jabber server at 17.149.36.99
Apple knows the iPhone's IP, which is then used for FaceTime and other push notifications.
Click to expand...

Oh, so heartening! Thanks, Even!
 
Woof said:
Hey now, I think that is a bit unfair. Everyone in business needs a financial advisor. He's been in real estate for the last decade right? So he is out of the loop on business related financials, and therefore it's a good idea to have a financial advisor who is on top of every law that relates to business. JMO.
Click to expand...

Fair call Woof. I'd dispute that "everyone in business needs a financial advisor" though. That's not necessarily true and I know many business people who successfully manage their own finances.
 
Isabellnecessary said:
What worries me is that we all think he did it. I see a few 'allegedly' comments there. Shouldn't there be more of those?

Is there anyone here who's willing to suspend belief to accept that possibly he didn't do it? Perhaps it was all an accident and he's made it 1000 times worse with his actions...

Sure with what's been released, it makes him look guilty. Guilty as heck. But let's entertain the notion that Australia has the presumption of innocence first and foremost. And who's releasing the info? Police, media etc.

I worry that this discussion is all trial by media and we're part of his 'getting off'. If Gordon Wood can be found innocent of murdering Caroline Byrne, then anyone can.
Click to expand...

You may or may not recall my first post here - only a week or so ago - in which I suggested that we really do need to keep a little corner of our mind open to the possibility that he may NOT be guilty. I got pretty soundly "scolded' for saying it, too. But I have a thick enough skin and accepted the general mood. However, no matter how unlikely (and I do think it is unlikely) there is the possibility (not the probability) that the real story may just be something we least expect.

I think that all the postulating, the hypothesizing, the sleuthing, etc etc is all fine - and I have to say that I enjoy it as much as the rest of you.

But maybe it's just my medical training (and I'm sure those with legal training would tend to think similarly) but I keep coming back to the reality that we have very little in the way of FACTS. We only have what we are told by the media, and what came out in that bail hearing.

If I were trying to diagnose a medical problem, there would be a degree of "gut instinct" in there for sure, but before suggesting treatment, we would need to have as many facts (eg history, examination, test results, etc) before making a provisional diagnosis. Even then, the final diagnosis is often not achieved until the pathologist gives us the reports on the tumour we've removed, or whatever.

It is that very logical, fact and evidence-based approach, that dictates that we MUST leave open the possibility that GBC is not guilty of what he APPEARS to be guilty of.

We just don't have enough information to make that call yet - that's what the legal process is for.

Dang - now I've gone and put myself in everybody's bad books again....! :please:
:truce:
 
alicat said:
Perhaps the strange thing seen at the roundabout was NBC trying to get WiFi? Maybe he was running around the roundabout searching for it - phone up in the air, tripping over etc.

IMO.
Click to expand...

Yep, UnfoldingTruth suggested this in the previous thread. It crossed my mind too.
 
Isabellnecessary said:
What worries me is that we all think he did it. I see a few 'allegedly' comments there. Shouldn't there be more of those?

Is there anyone here who's willing to suspend belief to accept that possibly he didn't do it? Perhaps it was all an accident and he's made it 1000 times worse with his actions...

Sure with what's been released, it makes him look guilty. Guilty as heck. But let's entertain the notion that Australia has the presumption of innocence first and foremost. And who's releasing the info? Police, media etc.

I worry that this discussion is all trial by media and we're part of his 'getting off'. If Gordon Wood can be found innocent of murdering Caroline Byrne, then anyone can.
Click to expand...

Stranger things have happened. We only know what the police and media want us to know and sometimes that information can be wrong.
 
DrWatson said:
You may or may not recall my first post here - only a week or so ago - in which I suggested that we really do need to keep a little corner of our mind open to the possibility that he may NOT be guilty. I got pretty soundly "scolded' for saying it, too. But I have a thick enough skin and accepted the general mood. However, no matter how unlikely (and I do think it is unlikely) there is the possibility (not the probability) that the real story may just be something we least expect.

I think that all the postulating, the hypothesizing, the sleuthing, etc etc is all fine - and I have to say that I enjoy it as much as the rest of you.

But maybe it's just my medical training (and I'm sure those with legal training would tend to think similarly) but I keep coming back to the reality that we have very little in the way of FACTS. We only have what we are told by the media, and what came out in that bail hearing.

If I were trying to diagnose a medical problem, there would be a degree of "gut instinct" in there for sure, but before suggesting treatment, we would need to have as many facts (eg history, examination, test results, etc) before making a provisional diagnosis. Even then, the final diagnosis is often not achieved until the pathologist gives us the reports on the tumour we've removed, or whatever.

It is that very logical, fact and evidence-based approach, that dictates that we MUST leave open the possibility that GBC is not guilty of what he APPEARS to be guilty of.

We just don't have enough information to make that call yet - that's what the legal process is for.

Dang - now I've gone and put myself in everybody's bad books again....! :please:
:truce:
Click to expand...

Agreed ... I keep a 1% open to other possibilities. :floorlaugh:
 
alicat said:
Perhaps the strange thing seen at the roundabout was NBC trying to get WiFi? Maybe he was running around the roundabout searching for it - phone up in the air, tripping over etc.

IMO.
Click to expand...

:floorlaugh:.. That would be a funny sight, in the middle of the night!

GlobeArtichoke said:
Yep, UnfoldingTruth suggested this in the previous thread. It crossed my mind too.
Click to expand...

No I didn't suggest this. I mentioned something about the wifi call being at a close time to when somebody witnessed something odd at the roundabout.. And whether he could have had the facetime call from there..not specifically that the odd thing was him wandering around trying to pick up wi fi..lol

But its funny one statement I saw in the news actually put the facecall at 12:20pm(rather than approximating it to 12:30pm)..and the 'odd' thing seen at the roundabout(which may or may not be relevant), was at approximately 12:30pm.. if the person who saw something odd was pretty spot on with time and facecall was actually 12:20pm leaves approx 10mins to get there from BC seniors house- if he took the facecall at home...just something to consider.
 
And for the record GBC now has 3 lawyers!!!!!

It's on the courier mail website but for some reason i can't copy and paste it
 
DrWatson said:
You may or may not recall my first post here - only a week or so ago - in which I suggested that we really do need to keep a little corner of our mind open to the possibility that he may NOT be guilty. I got pretty soundly "scolded' for saying it, too. But I have a thick enough skin and accepted the general mood. However, no matter how unlikely (and I do think it is unlikely) there is the possibility (not the probability) that the real story may just be something we least expect.

I think that all the postulating, the hypothesizing, the sleuthing, etc etc is all fine - and I have to say that I enjoy it as much as the rest of you.

But maybe it's just my medical training (and I'm sure those with legal training would tend to think similarly) but I keep coming back to the reality that we have very little in the way of FACTS. We only have what we are told by the media, and what came out in that bail hearing.

If I were trying to diagnose a medical problem, there would be a degree of "gut instinct" in there for sure, but before suggesting treatment, we would need to have as many facts (eg history, examination, test results, etc) before making a provisional diagnosis. Even then, the final diagnosis is often not achieved until the pathologist gives us the reports on the tumour we've removed, or whatever.

It is that very logical, fact and evidence-based approach, that dictates that we MUST leave open the possibility that GBC is not guilty of what he APPEARS to be guilty of.

We just don't have enough information to make that call yet - that's what the legal process is for.

Dang - now I've gone and put myself in everybody's bad books again....! :please:
:truce:
Click to expand...

Nope.. there are a few of us who have kept an open mind or tried to. I still have a degree of this- simply as the law is, innocent until proven guilty. However in my mind that gap has narrowed quite considerably. We can't convict him without the facts, however what we have so far is very compelling and the fact is we are not the ones making the ultimate decision on this..unless we happened by sheer chance to be called up for jury duty in this case. However then we will be presented with ALL the facts as they are known.

I think given what we know and the fact I believe the police know alot more and would not arrest without good reason, I believe the likelihood of his guilt is extremely high.

MOO
 
Champagne4lulu said:
I have a few questions for Hawkins et al...

With Chris nyst joining the team, would you think that gbc and his family perhaps are not confident with their current representatives? Why would they choose to bring this guy on when they are supposedly represented by some pretty hefty council already? And given this guy has represented a few cases now surely he would know the rules about being approved before speaking with the defendant so why on earth throw a tanty because he wasn't allowed in? Seems reasonable to me. Or is this just about creating a bit of a story for the media?

Could it be they can't afford Peter Davis sc any longer?

Should we be concerned about another solicitor joining ranks or this a sign of trouble for the defense team

I'd just like to know wth is going on? How many lawyers will be on this thing - and more importantly, how is our team looking as opponents?

All IMO etc.
Click to expand...

The best thing Campbell Newman could do is reassure the Dickies and the public that he will ensure the prosecution team have all resources at their disposal, to match the might and power that will hit from the accused's defence team. However we know CN was until recently an FB friend of GBC's and NBC is connected to police commish Bob Atkinson.....so perhaps you might understand why I might sound a little skeptical about a successful conviction here??

Then what - massive compensation payout? Could earn more that he ever earned in real estate. JMO
 
July 03, 2012 12:00AM

GERARD Baden-Clay has sought legal advice from yet another top Queensland criminal lawyer, confirming to authorities that three law firms were now helping him with his legal defence.
The 41-year-old former real estate agent accused of killing his wife was yesterday relocated from Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre's medical unit to a protected cell, but not before a visit from one of Brisbane's leading defence lawyers, Michael Bosscher.

Upon exiting the correctional centre in Wacol yesterday afternoon, Mr Bosscher refused to comment on whether Baden-Clay was a new client.

"No quotes at this stage," he said.

"I'm not even confirming I've been to see him. I come out here every single day to see different people."

The Courier-Mail understands Baden-Clay has written to Queensland Corrective Services informing them he wants to extend his legal counsel from Jacobson Mahony Lawyers, to also include Bosscher Lawyers and Nyst Lawyers, thereby giving their representatives clearance to visit him in prison.

Mr Bosscher, formerly a senior partner of one of Australia's biggest criminal practice law firm, Ryan Bosscher, is renowned for his outspoken views on legal reform and has represented high-profile clients including former Brisbane Lion captain, now coach, Michael Voss and top swim coach Scott Volkers.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/third-lawyer-joins-baden-clay-team/story-e6freon6-1226415091838
 
CaseClosed said:
GBC must have had 2 x $1 coins in his prison gear pockets to actually retain the additional 2 legal eagles :floorlaugh:
Click to expand...

I am sure there will be an other email sent out soon begging for more funds to pay for the legal team.
 
Isabellnecessary said:
What worries me is that we all think he did it. I see a few 'allegedly' comments there. Shouldn't there be more of those?

Is there anyone here who's willing to suspend belief to accept that possibly he didn't do it? Perhaps it was all an accident and he's made it 1000 times worse with his actions...

Sure with what's been released, it makes him look guilty. Guilty as heck. But let's entertain the notion that Australia has the presumption of innocence first and foremost. And who's releasing the info? Police, media etc.

I worry that this discussion is all trial by media and we're part of his 'getting off'. If Gordon Wood can be found innocent of murdering Caroline Byrne, then anyone can.
Click to expand...

Theres always the possibility, but it is looking quite slim.. but that doesn't mean its not there. However regarding the comment perhaps it was an accident and he's made it 1000 times worse by his actions.. Even if its an accident, he still did it(if he is guilty as alleged). Somehow if it was an accident its a little bit less abhorrent..however his actions since if that was the case do not make it seem he would be in the least bit remorseful.. The fake TXT messages Friday morning to Allison to see where she was, the dumping of the body, the call to insurance company before her body was identified.. the email/phone call to his mistress to say he had to lay low.. made it more than 1000 times worse IMO.. Now of course it is still only alleged at this stage that he did kill Allison, but all those things if he did and it was an accident, negate any leniancy to me and do not seem like remorse, more calculating and callous.. but just MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 74 more.
Total: 3,691 (members: 75, guests: 3,616)

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
3,616
Total visitors
3,691
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,284
Messages
17,966,677
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top