Australia - Warriena Wright, 26, dies in balcony fall, Surfers Paradise, Aug 2014 #10

[Trooper]

If a 26 yo dies in a hospital and a doctor can explain the death, then the coroner is not interested in it. Thas just one scenario I get what you are saying, but now that the verdict is in, and trial details know, it is a formality to classify it as death by accident. The point I was making is the Police are trying to give some impression they are still on the case, and they most definitely are not. Their window has passed and they have wasted a lot of time and taxpayers money trying to achieve the impossible with very very little.

BBM for clarity.

entirely imaginary, and unsupported by any empirical evidence and merely a product of a bad hamburger or an overheated imagination.

 

[Elde Fruit]

Another one of your many excellent posts. Would you advance an opinion on why such flimsy charges were even raised? Any idea at all? Even with my minor knowledge of law i could not understand how these charges would succeed, given the lack of any real evidence?

I can only speculate. As I have already said, I believe the DPP had no expectation they would win. They thought they might perhaps on the coat tails of sympathy for the deceased. Hardly a professional approach, so unlikely. Perhaps, in light in the Baden-Clay matter, they thought (unsurprisingly given the Posts here on the matter) there would be such a public back lash, they did not want to go down that path. Hence, perhaps, a show Trial to appease those baying for the blood of the obvious scape goat. It is also conceivable they thought they might create a precedent on causation in a manslaughter trial where they could argue overwhelming fear as the required link between the death and the act of the accused. Who knows. My lean is toward the 'show trial' theory, given the Baden-Clay events. "If we don't indict this bloke, even though our chances are zero, there will be a public outcry, the politicians will get nervous and force our hand to our professional embarrassment. Let's go 'show,' and the public will have no choice but to accept a Jury verdict of not guilty, whereas if we decide not to prosecute, it will never end." The Baden-Clay case has had unintended consequences, not just of a strictly technical legal kind. I am so pleased I was not here when that saga was under way!

 

[possumheart]

Allegedly:

-OP(Balconybrah) is an Aussie miscer
-OP met with a girl from Tinder earlier this year
-They go to his apartment, have some drinks
-Balconybrah eventually assaults the girl, drags her to his balcony and she falls to her death (over a 10 story fall)
-Balconybrah called his lawyer, fled the scene and ordered a pizza before eventually turning himself in later that day
-Balconybrah is eventually arrested and charged with her death
-Balconybrah recorded the time he spent with the girl (http://www22.zippyshare.com/v/37693337/file.html)
-The recording doesn't prove his innocence/guilt of her death, but proves he's guilty of assault & imprisoning someone against their will
-Balconybrah is granted bail
-Balconybrah posts this thread, which will has likely irreparably damaged whatever defense his lawyers have prepared
-Balconybrah is confirmed to be the least intelligent sociopath of all time

http://www22.zippyshare.com/v/37693337/file.html
http://www.hollilla.com/reader.php?action=thread&thread=4650826&offset=1020

 

[sosocurious]

I think we are all still struggling to understand why ALL of the evidence was not allowed. How many times we have heard the judge instruct the jury to consider all of the evidence.
It is very difficult to understand why that was not the case in this trial.
We have heard that it is because of 'legal arguments'. But what legal arguments? What precedences (or whatever) can dictate such a thing? And why has this not happened before?

I just do not understand that his post actions could not be considered.
The poor fellow below witnessed the fall and his immediate response was to calll 000 and get in the lift and to go down and help.
Tostee ....... ???????
imo

 

[Mandala]

As promised - here is a link to the full Audio:

I will only leave this available until later tonight - so I suggest that you download the file.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/w68e2nzpkwj8nye/Tostee Tape.mp3?dl=0

The link isn't working

 

[Makara]

While it is the fact that Warriena's death has been ruled in respect of Gabe Tostee as not guilty of her murder, the CORONER has not made a ruling...this should be obvious as to WHY the coroner hasn't made a ruling while the matter was subjudice almost immediately...

The Coroner hasn't made a ruling because he/she CANNOT do so until any criminal matter has been resolved. And now the options for the coroner are , as texted before, Suicide, Accident, or Open Finding.

Thus....this is normal proceure.. Nothing whatsoever to do with PR stunts..

Warriena' death was an unexpected event, in a public place, and her death would have come under the Coroners jurisdiction regardless of Tostee's involvement . Just about any 26 yr olds death would, and does. Every one knows this.

Thanks Poss. Warriena's death will indeed be referred to the coroner, irrespective of what some idiots say.

 

[Elde Fruit]

not correct.. The Coroner hasn't pronounced a verdict yet.. unless he /she did so in the last 2 minutes.. as of now, Warriena's death , as far as the coroner is concerned is unpronounced. So no one has ' assailed ' a verdict that hasn't been given.

No matter what a mere Coroner concludes, the 'Not Guilty' verdict of this Supreme Court Jury is unassailable. There is no Coroner in this Land who is going to come to a conclusion which discredits the Jury's verdict. That's a very dry gully Folks.

 

[possumheart]

The link isn't working

Original source I think: http://www22.zippyshare.com/v/37693337/file.html
Don't know if it will work.

 

[Makara]

I can only speculate. As I have already said, I believe the DPP had no expectation they would win. They thought they might perhaps on the coat tails of sympathy for the deceased. Hardly a professional approach, so unlikely. Perhaps, in light in the Baden-Clay matter, they thought (unsurprisingly given the Posts here on the matter) there would be such a public back lash, they did not want to go down that path. Hence, perhaps, a show Trial to appease those baying for the blood of the obvious scape goat. It is also conceivable they thought they might create a precedent on causation in a manslaughter trial where they could argue overwhelming fear as the required link between the death and the act of the accused. Who knows. My lean is toward the 'show trial' theory, given the Baden-Clay events. "If we don't indict this bloke, even though our chances are zero, there will be a public outcry, the politicians will get nervous and force our hand to our professional embarrassment. Let's go 'show,' and the public will have no choice but to accept a Jury verdict of not guilty, whereas if we decide not to prosecute, it will never end." The Baden-Clay case has had unintended consequences, not just of a strictly technical legal kind. I am so pleased I was not here when that saga was under way!

So are we!

 

[possumheart]

Thanks Poss. Warriena's death will indeed be referred to the coroner, irrespective of what some idiots say.

I didn't say that, the quote tags went haywire, I don't know what happened. Perhaps Trooper said it.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Quote Originally Posted by Elde Fruit View Post
I can only speculate. As I have already said, I believe the DPP had no expectation they would win. They thought they might perhaps on the coat tails of sympathy for the deceased. Hardly a professional approach, so unlikely. Perhaps, in light in the Baden-Clay matter, they thought (unsurprisingly given the Posts here on the matter) there would be such a public back lash, they did not want to go down that path. Hence, perhaps, a show Trial to appease those baying for the blood of the obvious scape goat. It is also conceivable they thought they might create a precedent on causation in a manslaughter trial where they could argue overwhelming fear as the required link between the death and the act of the accused. Who knows. My lean is toward the 'show trial' theory, given the Baden-Clay events. "If we don't indict this bloke, even though our chances are zero, there will be a public outcry, the politicians will get nervous and force our hand to our professional embarrassment. Let's go 'show,' and the public will have no choice but to accept a Jury verdict of not guilty, whereas if we decide not to prosecute, it will never end." The Baden-Clay case has had unintended consequences, not just of a strictly technical legal kind. I am so pleased I was not here when that saga was under way!

So are we!

Me too

 

[jessicalouise]

No matter what a mere Coroner concludes, the 'Not Guilty' verdict of this Supreme Court Jury is unassailable. There is no Coroner in this Land who is going to come to a conclusion which discredits the Jury's verdict. That's a very dry gully Folks.

Yes. We know this.

 

[Froglady]

Original source I think: http://www22.zippyshare.com/v/37693337/file.html
Don't know if it will work.

Nope :/.

 

[Trooper]

No matter what a mere Coroner concludes, the 'Not Guilty' verdict of this Supreme Court Jury is unassailable. There is no Coroner in this Land who is going to come to a conclusion which discredits the Jury's verdict. That's a very dry gully Folks.

no one has suggested the COroner would do any such of a thing. But the coroner still has the last word. He/she could rule her death as an Open Finding, not being satisfied that she fell to her death due to accident. He/she could find that her death resulted in a desire to commit suicide. The coroner could also rule it an accidental death, .. but no coroner is obligated to structure their Manner of Death certificate predicated on the trial or verdict of a jury. The Coroner cant say that she was murdered by Gabe but the coroner if she/he so finds it, after consultation and investigation , that she was murdered but NOT by Gabe, then that is the ruling that will be made.

The Coroners office is entirely independent, and it's a bit worrying that anyone who claims to be a 'highly trained legal operative' doesn't know this .

 

[Mandala]

Thanks but that one doesn't work either

 

[Makara]

I didn't say that, the quote tags went haywire, I don't know what happened. Perhaps Trooper said it.

It's all good. I was replying to and agreeing with your post below.

Originally Posted by possumheart
While it is the fact that Warriena's death has been ruled in respect of Gabe Tostee as not guilty of her murder, the CORONER has not made a ruling...this should be obvious as to WHY the coroner hasn't made a ruling while the matter was subjudice almost immediately...

The Coroner hasn't made a ruling because he/she CANNOT do so until any criminal matter has been resolved. And now the options for the coroner are , as texted before, Suicide, Accident, or Open Finding.

Thus....this is normal proceure.. Nothing whatsoever to do with PR stunts..

Warriena' death was an unexpected event, in a public place, and her death would have come under the Coroners jurisdiction regardless of Tostee's involvement . Just about any 26 yr olds death would, and does. Every one knows this.

 

[Mandala]

Anyone else have a link?

 

[Trooper]

So are we!

amen to that !!

 

[LozDa]

I've no idea what is going on any more. Trooper, have you started a band, or perhaps a pizza parlour? Or have you started a cult? If the quotes are anything to go by, you've changed. :laughing:

 

[possumheart]

Nope :/.

sorry