The aftermath of the verdict *MERGED*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
These definitions pretty much cover it all. Take your pick -
"confidence man
Function: noun
Meaning: a dishonest person who uses clever means to cheat others out of something of value.
Synonyms bilk, bilker, cheat, cheater, chiseler (or chiseller), confidence man, cozener, defrauder, dodger, fakir, finagler, fraudster [chiefly British], hoaxer, scammer, scamster, shark, sharper, sharpie (or sharpy), skinner, swindler, tricker
Related Words double-crosser, double-dealer; bluffer, charlatan, fake, faker, humbug, impostor (or imposter), mountebank, phony (also phoney), pretender, quack, quacksalver, ringer, sham; adventurer, fox, gamesman, knave, prankster, rascal, rogue; fast-talker, slick, slicker, slickster, slyboots, smoothy (or smoothie), wheeler-dealer; plotter, schemer, sneak, sneaker; blackleg, cardsharp (or cardsharper)"
 
I just watched Prosecuting Casey Anthony this afternoon on foxtel, it was fascinating and drew many parallels with this case regarding evidence in particular. For Aussie sleuthers it is on again at 2:15 am on Premier if any night owls are up to it.
 
Appeals are a worry in light of this case:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/rivkin-driver-acquitted-of-murder-20120224-1tu2m.html
Wood's barrister Tim Game SC submitted that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence. His submission spoke of nine grounds for appeal. One was that the trial miscarried by reason of the prejudice occasioned by the Tedeschi's closing address. Others related to criticisms of Barr's directions to the jury.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Caroline_Byrne
 
Just wondering if this has been mentioned before as it is a little close to home at the moment. Lariam ,Mefloquine or any other anti malaria drugs, their contraindications and the possible use of it to surreptitiously destabilize someones mental health? Doc?
 
Not unusually, you are correct, I didn't quote from the Autopsy report, in my haste this morning I grabbed a quote from the link relating to evidence that was subject to legal argument.....would have linked it but I'll be buggered if I can work out how to do that with an iPhone. I'm very wary of attempting to debate an expert on something I'm far from expert about, and I am very conscious that I haven't the time to devote to appropriately considering the detail. I am so glad we have someone here who can and does do that for us.

I agree the "IF" seemed a very big one, I was amazed it had been uttered at all really. A moot point anyway I guess as he was found guilty, in no small part due to the work of QPS but also due to the minds of Websleuths members.

What that document I can't manage to link to described for me, was a far more intensely personal and violent attack. Good reason I guess why the defence acted to suppress. Thanks for your consideration Doc.



DrWatson said:
That is a very big "IF" though. It's the key word. And microscopic examination could not say that it was a haemorrhage. Again, I'd just point out that the wording was Nathan Milne being thorough and covering all POSSIBILITIES, as he had to.

The bottom line, you'll recall, is that he could NOT determine a cause of death - not a definite one, not a probable one, and not even a possible one. There were several POSSIBILITIES left open, because they couldn't be excluded.

EDIT: Actually, I've just read through the full autopsy report again, and I can't find Dr Milne saying what was quoted above. Perhaps that was the judge's interpretation of it? What Dr Milne actually says is:

"1. Subdural haemorrhage. If this was a true injury it indicates a blunt force impact to the head, probably of a moderate degree of force. Subdural haemorrhage can occur without a skull fracture. If death was the result of a subdural haemorrhage, it could have taken hours to occur after the time of impact. Impaired consciousness from a subdural haemorrhage could also predispose to drowning. There is no evidence to suggest she had a bleeding tendency."

That is in his conclusions.

Earlier he says:

"On naked eye examination, there was some granular brown material between the left side of the brain and the dura. The appearance raised the possibility of a subdural haemorrhage, however due to the effects of decomposition this could not be confirmed on naked eye or microscopic examination. It remains a possibility that there was a subdural haemorrhage."

BBM - he HAS to leave open the POSSIBILITY to be thorough. He can't 100% exclude it.

And that's all he said, basically.
Click to expand...
 
That is so scary! I remember it well,so similar..fingers crossed
 
Isisrising said:
I too believe his parents have alot to answer for.

Always a contentious subject, as people love to say someone was 'born evil' or 'wired wrong', but I believe that nurture plays a HUGE role in the personality of the adult.

You can usually see the patterns played out in the family system as a whole. In my experience, adults who lack empathy and live lives of deceit did not grow up in homes that were emotionally healthy. They typically grow up in an emotional vacuum - no real depth of emotion in the home, alot of pretence, layers of lies, a focus on the externals in life rather than reflecting on the internal........the list could go on and on!

But that doesn't excuse anything that the adult then chooses to do. I don't see 'nurture' as a cop out or an excuse. More an explanation of how someone got to where they did.

We always have choice - at any point in our life. We're always free to break the family patterns......but it takes a lot of courage to take that path.

And courage is one thing - amongst many noble qualities - that GBC is lacking!!! He just stuck blindly to the script.:facepalm:
Click to expand...


hmm....not at all sure. My ex husband had a child with his girlfriend in his teen years, and the child was adopted. He contacted us at 21 years of age. OMG. He was a clone of my ex. All the mannerisms were exactly the same, in the same industry/career - almost the same job, most of the same interests and even though he was given a different name, his adoptive parents gave him the name of my ex. He even had the same inflections in his voice. It was actually rather scary. Until meeting him I would have thought nurture had a far bigger impact, but now i think they probably have equal impact.
 
Sorry if this has already been mentioned - I'm in catch-up mode...
Did anyone manage to get a full copy of the Missing Person Registers FB post?
The page is now unavailable :(
 
Aussie_expat.sg said:
hmm....not at all sure. My ex husband had a child with his girlfriend in his teen years, and the child was adopted. He contacted us at 21 years of age. OMG. He was a clone of my ex. All the mannerisms were exactly the same, in the same industry/career - almost the same job, most of the same interests and even though he was given a different name, his adoptive parents gave him the name of my ex. He even had the same inflections in his voice. It was actually rather scary. Until meeting him I would have thought nurture had a far bigger impact, but now i think they probably have equal impact.
Click to expand...
eta copy
 
BJ

Finally you are getting some rest.

Your dedication to Allison via WS is to be commended.

Sweet dreams.
 
"Last night Allison’s family told of their anguish at the appeal.
“It’s been a difficult time for the family, just let her rest in peace,” one of Allison’s relatives told The Courier-Mail. Poor poor family. How much do they have to bear from this man who not only thinks only of himself but also seems to care little for what this is doing to his children.
 
JK673 said:
Hahaha I get it.....

Someone said verdict of murder.

MRSA says verdict of murder is unreasonable because murder is the charge. They are correcting the original poster as it should have been stated verdict of guilty....


Hahahaha
Click to expand...
Not quite ...

OP was quoting thechronicle.com.au - which was itself quoting documents filed by the defence.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
DrWatson said:
Please allow me to answer some of the assertions or conclusions you have in your post - nothing personal, but merely correcting a couple of misconceptions:

I agree with you that Allison finding out about the affair being ongoing may well have devastated her, BUT - and this is a big "but" - you say that the levels of anti-depressant in her body were 12 times the normal levels of anti-depressant. That is actually NOT the case, and seems to have been completely misread by the defence. The blood and tissue samples that were used for the sertraline assays were from Allison's liver - which NORMALLY (i.e. On a normal therapeutic dose of Zoloft) can have a concentration of between 50-90 times HIGHER than the levels in the peripheral blood. And that is in a living person, due to the concentration effect performed by the liver accumulating the drug before metabolising it. If you then add in the effects of post-mortem redistribution, to which you allude, the levels may be higher or lower. In Allison's case, those liver levels were actually LOWER than I would have expected. Even the toxicologists - both prosecution and defence ones - agreed that the levels found were NOT consistent with either the recent ingestion of Zoloft nor an overdose of any kind.

You mention Allison being found in her walking clothes far from her "normal walking route" - yet we only have GBC's word that she actually went walking at all. She had a walking machine at home. None of her friends (including a couple I know well) supported Allison being a walker. She wasn't. So there was no such thing as her "normal walking route" - that was all a furphy by GBC.

You mention the discrepancy between the lack of blood found on the property, but blood being found in the car. My explanation for the likely reason for that is that the blood in the car occurred as a result of Allison's body being dumped in the back of the car. In other words, the injury occurred IN the car. Even the recently dead can lose some blood from richly vascularized tissues such as the scalp, and although much of her scalp was missing when she was found, due to decomposition, it is quite conceivable that her head banged up against that tie-down buckle loop or the surround when she was tossed into the back of the Captiva, and the blood - which was a relatively small amount - would easily have been sufficient to form that small "rivulet" as the judge described it. So - injury in the car, but unnecessary to assume injury and hence blood elsewhere in or on the property.

And finally, I agree with you that there was no direct evidence to place either GBC or the Captiva at the Kholo Creek bridge. Except that Allison was there, and if all the other evidence fits the theory that GBC murdered her, then it follows that either GBC or somebody he enlisted MUST have taken the body out there.

I hope the logic of all that makes some sort of sense. ;)
Click to expand...


This is why we love and need you here Doc. :loveyou:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 207 more.
Total: 3,883 (members: 208, guests: 3,675)

Online statistics

Members online
208
Guests online
3,675
Total visitors
3,883
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,298
Messages
17,966,965
Members
228,737
Latest member
clintbentwood
Back
Top