If we are being drawn into semantics then yes, you are correct (however I never used the word fact). However Byrne QC would not have entertained the thought of making submissions as to no case to answer if he genuinely did not believe that the prosecution case was defective. Obviously I cannot and will not speak on his behalf but I'd be shocked if he wasn't chuffed at the defence position at the end of yesterday, and I've seen nothing damaging to the defence case today. In saying that, nothing has been said that enhances the defence case IMO but I feel that is a mere formality given the direction this trial has taken.
<modsnip>
I was going to reply to this earlier but ran out of time.
<modsnip>. I understand that some here have formed an opinion and nothing will sway them from that belief and that is fine, there is no presumption of innocence in the court of public opinion but some comments say more about the poster than the target.
To those who are lamenting the fact that GBC is being allowed to speak at length about what they consider irrelevant matters (which would be challenged by both prosecution and Judge if they were truly irrelevant) consider this - Here is a man, a man on trial for a crime which if convicted, carries the distinct possibility of a sentence which will see him die in prison. One might make the argument that Allison was denied the most basic right of them all, the right to life but to disregard the right of the accused to a fair trial and to lead evidence on his behalf is terribly hypocritical.
As I've stated before, I have an opinion myself and for what it's worth I believe Allison has met with foul play. However if I was sitting on the jury at this point I could not say that Allison was the victim of a homicide beyond a reasonable doubt, much less that GBC was responsible for her death. Breaking it down to a few bullet points -
- No definitive cause of death (whether it be homicide, accident, suicide or natural causes)
- No crime scene
- No weapon
- Nothing that places GBC at the location of Allison's body
On this basis, I could not possibly convict and while I'm sure there will be a few dissenters at some point during deliberations, I personally believe a jury will come to the same conclusion <modsnip>
For those extolling GBC's apparent narcissistic "virtues", have you stopped to consider that whether someone who fulfils the DSM-IV criteria for NPD is capable of such elaborate concealment of both the murder scene and their whereabouts when disposing of Allison's body? Despite having some of the best investigators in the state being assigned to this case and basically unlimited monetary and technological resources at their disposal, they have been unable to locate a murder scene, weapon or place GBC at the bridge. Playing devil's advocate (although I hate that term), I don't believe that someone with NPD or even narcissistic tendencies would have the foresight to eliminate or conceal a wealth of potential forensic evidence as well as plan the disposal of the body in such a way that absolutely zero evidence was led that they were even in the remote vicinity.
Just my opinion of course, no offence intended to any posters<modsnip>!
