The Crown v Gerard Baden-Clay, 10th July - Trial Day 18

[BritsKate]

Thanks i knew i had heard of it somewhere

No worries. Apologies for not quoting...tapatalk hates me.


Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[ollijack]

Oh my God. I hope this doesn't come back to bite the
Prosecution. I can just see Defence demanding a miss trial

 

[BrissyLass]

I must admit that giving the jury a transcript seems like a pretty sensible idea. That, plus the warning not to use the internet makes me wonder if the rules of jurorship (if that's a word) aren't due for an overhaul. We're all so much more connected to information these days, that some jurors are going to expect transcripts and to be able to use the internet as a resource.

it's going to be fascinating if they troop back in on a regular basis for a reread of a) court docs or b) the riot act!

I'm not sure about why the jury are not given written transcripts, perhaps they should be, I'm sure there is a good reason for that, but your other point about jurors expecting to be able to use the internet.... NO Chance and this is something that drives me insane (not you Miss Fisher) but people in general.

They are in a Court of Law, they are on a jury in a high profile case, a very sensitive case and they have been instructed VERY clearly about what they can and cannot do and yet someone on that jury, and perhaps more than one juror (heaven forbid, lets hope not) has just not given a toss about anything the Judge has said and gone home and done an internet search on "how to deliberate"

it's a lack of respect to the law, the court system and the position of juror :twocents:

ok, sorry, vent over

 

[Hillsdon]

In my webslomnia overnight, I started thinking about this crime from a different angle, trying to get inside the mind of a criminal mastermind. Clearly, I'm not and neither is GBC - not such a bad thing.

IMO, GBC fairly quickly determined only two alternative versions would clear him: suicide and misadventure. There was more circumstantial evidence favouring the former, but only the latter would see him paid her life insurance, hence IMO the insistence to police early that there were no mental health/medication/relationship issues (this assumed prominence later, when his own liberty became more important IMO).

So, I think there were only, in each case, just a few more things GBC needed to do in order to make either credible, to my mind at least. As you would appreciate by now, I mean no disrespect to Allison in writing this, just thinking from a defendant's perspective.

Misadventure

1. Admit the scratches were inflicted during an argument about the resumed affair/not attempt to conceal them;
2. Concoct that Allison fled the house, on foot, in an agitated state;
3. Not get blood in her car;
4. Not get plant matter in her hair;
5. Not recharge your phone, or say you did because you were awake, worried sick;
6. 'Cleanse' A's handset (as nothing incriminating's been found via the telco) and leave it in plain sight, at home or on her person;
7. Deposit the body closer to home, but inflict further injury in doing so to both mask existing and suggest a violent (other) attacker;
8. Remove A's jewellery;
9. Approach the required phone calls in the correct order and act at least 30% more normal.

Suicide

1. As above;
2. As above, but by car;
3. As above;
4. As above;
5. As above;
6. As above, but leave it at home;
7. Deposit the body at the bridge, but over rather than under it, in order to inflict injury consistent with a fall from that height;
8. Leave her car at the bridge;
9. As above.

He might just have gotten away with it. What do you think?

Hi HO

I totally agree, he was so close to getting away with it. I believe that originally (immediately after the act) he was planning on making it look like an abduction and random act, however once the ball got rolling he discovered that this almost never happens in brisbane... So he needed a new story, so he started (a little late) the suicide theory.

Hillsdon

 

[missfisher]

Excellent and logical advice.

I just can't believe a juror did that, after all the warnings from the Judge. :facepalm:

There's no IQ test...

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

Excellent and logical advice.

I just can't believe a juror did that, after all the warnings from the Judge. :facepalm:

Why thank you!

Actually, as much as I turn to the Internet for everyday "how to" questions, it never crossed my mind to look up that particular task.

 

[BrissyLass]

I'm concerned now about the jury. Should be pretty obvious that a US guide to deliberating is off the mark, not to mention prohibited.

exactly, but this is the thing isn't it.... a jury is a random selection of the community

i'm a little concerned

 

[Aunty]

Eammon Atkinson ‏@EAtkinson7 45s

#BadenClay judge tells jury not to do their own research after jury member takes document to deliberation room @7NewsBrisbane

I think we have an insulted angry Judge. :croc:

He made the rules very very very clear yesterday , when I was there.

WTF
The Jury asking for a copy of his directions ???
A member of the Jury has deliberately ignored the Judge and rules???
:snake: is lurking amongst them ?

 

[Amee]

Emmy Kubainski ‏@emmykubainski 3m

Jury warned not to use internet, social media, mobiles, text books...anything other than material from the court. @7NewsBrisbane #badenclay

 

[BJsleuth]

Again....why are they NOT sequestered!!!!

Lol, that's what my husband just said!

I'm stunned at all the things that have happened with this jury, approached by media and once by a woman in purple, now downloading deliberation advice that's from a completely different jurisdiction. It's like a bad movie.

 

[possumheart]

I'm totally appalled, even if GBC is convicted it is now virtually certain that there will be an appeal (with some merit) forthcoming.

Will try and dig up some case law in relation to jury misconduct and internet searches, please bear with me mods.

The Judiciary will only allow an appeal if the grounds are sufficient, and are very mindful to avoid that. I would be interested in how you can possibly predict that there are grounds for appeal already - at this very moment in time. Are you saying that the Judge has not wrapped this up properly?

 

[Zorro]

My "How to Deliberate Guide":

Go round the table and see who has an inclination or has decided on which way to go. Ask the minority group to outline their arguments. Find the points of difference and work them through. Then ...

Go round the table and see who has an inclination or has decided on which way to go. Ask the minority group to outline their arguments. Find the points of difference and work them through. Then ...

Go round the table and see who has an inclination or has decided on which way to go. Ask the minority group to outline their arguments. Find the points of difference and work them through. Then ...

Go round the table and see who has an inclination or has decided on which way to go. Ask the minority group to outline their arguments. Find the points of difference and work them through. Then ...

A unanimous decision has to be made so don't be coy about it.

 

[alioop]

It has not been mentioned in this trial at all as a charge. It has certainly been mentioned that Allison's body was dumped, therefore implying the notion of interference with a corpse, but it is not part of THIS trial.

I would imagine that QPS may not have wanted to create any form of confusion or ambiguity in this trial by having to prosecute two charges rather than one to the jury. I have no doubt that once he is found guilty there would be absolutely no reason why they could not then go forward with interfering with a corpse, especially if they are thinking of charging mnore than one person with the crime.

JMHO.

Cheers.

I think you are right about no interference with a corpse charge. Even though the media has reported he pled not guilty at the beginning of the trial to both charges, when you look at the tweets and articles it only says "charge". Not charges. I don't think it has been mentioned at all during the trial. The judge would have had to instruct the jury about both charges if there was the two but he didn't. Therefore I now think the only charge at trial is the murder one.

I suspect this is not tactical as such with a view to charging others or GBC again, just superfluous because if he is convicted of murder then he gets the life with min of 15 years no parole. The prosecution could just then concentrate on the murder and no other charges.

 

[BrissyLass]

I'm totally appalled, even if GBC is convicted it is now virtually certain that there will be an appeal (with some merit) forthcoming.

Will try and dig up some case law in relation to jury misconduct and internet searches, please bear with me mods.

Yes, there is going to a case for an appeal for sure now, probably a legal aid funded appeal even

 

[Surfeegirl]

Do we have a Jury Foreperson?

 

[Amee]

1:35pm: Justice Byrne discharged the jury once more but asked them to return minutes later for him to reiterate his instructions to them, at the request of the prosecution and defence counsels.

"I draw your attention once more to what I said on this topic. You must not inquire outside the courtroom about anything that relates to the trial. So you must not use any aid such as a text book to conduct research and, except in this courtroom, you must not in any seek or receive information about questions that arise in the trial, or about the accused, or about witnesses or the deceased," he said.

"For example, conducting research using the internet, or by communicating by someone by phone, email, or on Twitter, through any blog or website, including the social networking websites such as Facebook, Linked In or You Tube.

"Thank you for your attention."

The jury has resumed its deliberations.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...y-18-week-5-20140710-3bnzp.html#ixzz3727RUBe0

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Sky News Australia ‏@SkyNewsAust 46s
Jurors told they must not inquire about anything relating to the trial outside the courtroom


:slap:

 

[sheldor]

I'm totally appalled, even if GBC is convicted it is now virtually certain that there will be an appeal (with some merit) forthcoming.

Will try and dig up some case law in relation to jury misconduct and internet searches, please bear with me mods.

I don't know about law in Australia, but if it was here in NZ I doubt that much would be done about them looking up info on jury deliberations. The only case I know of where there was a successful appeal (actually and English case) was where jury used a ouija board! There has to be a real risk that the jury's deliberations were skewed by the material.

 

[Fluffykins]

Was in main court today. Poor Mr Dickies eyes are so bloodshot and all parties look really weary. Defence, Prosecution..even jury. Mark Ainsworth sat next to Mr Dickie and seems to be mulling around with the Dickies. The Dickies friends have been handing out yellow ribbons to their close family/friends. As Gerbil was leaving court, NBC, EBC and OBW were trying to talk to him and he looked at them and shook his head and kept walking. They all looked a bit disappointed. The Dickies have their own private room next to court room and same with BC's. Media will have 12 seats in the court when the jury deliver their verdict. Plus 12 seats for each side of family. Gerbil looked really stressed out before he left room. Hand to forehead. Let's hope for a great result! Hot Toddy has done a great job. My prediction - tomorrow verdict, but would be so happy for today so I can finally sleep well know Gerbil is locked up.

BBM. "Hot Toddy" - brilliant! :tyou::great::skip:

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

 

[possumheart]

Yes, there is going to a case for an appeal for sure now, probably a legal aid funded appeal even

You have completely lost me JCB and BrissyLass. On what grounds? What have I missed here?