Allison Baden-Clay - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD #41

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Redlightthroughpaper, if I ask you anything you're uncomfortable with, please feel free to ignore the question. I completely understand (if one possibly could) how sensitive this situation is, for you and others close to Allison and GBC.

I wanted to just ask, if I could, how would you describe the gut feeling that the people who knew the BC's had in the early days of the search, right from when it came over the radio that a Brookefield mother of three was missing? I remember when I heard about it, I pricked my ears, because the announcement said the mother of three was last seen by her husband when she went for a walk at 10 pm, and then he went to bed. He reported her missing the next morning. I immediately thought that sounded odd.

My question is, did the people who knew Allison have a slight hunch, like a thought in the back of their mind, that GBC was possibly behind it? or was there complete faith in the gone for a walk story, for a few days at least?

Actually I remember too the reporting of her depression, by OW, but other reports, from people we now know to be Allisons friends, saying she would never have left her girls. What were those people thinking had happened? Fallen down a hole?

I'm just curious, as even though I'm sure no-one ever saw him as the murderous type, did they see him as 100% devoted and caring, and honest, or not quite?
I know there were many people who knew he was conducting an affair behind Allisons back, but there were probably many who didn't know about that. Did there seem to be an element of doubt about the walk theory?
I suppose no-one would have been game to say even if they did have that gut feeling at the time.

Like I said, ignore fully if you like or just anwer in any way you're comfortable.

Thanks.

I should add, that my question is really just a personal enquiry so as I can learn to better protect myself from the people that are potential killers that mingle amongst us in society.
 
I am not surprised that the judge made the same decision as the Suncorp money.

Not a decision made in the interests of the girls at this stage, it is a decision that protects GBC's interests in the money, which considering he is innocent until proven guilty and was Allison's nominated beneficiary is in my opinion the right legal decision.

There will be a lot more to do with this money held by the court in the future regardless of the result of criminal charges as there are a number of legal issues that will impact on its ultimate beneficiary.
 
Zim said:
Slain mother Allison Baden-Clay's life insurance payouts frozen

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...outs-frozen-20130206-2dy1a.html#ixzz2K5T3EYy7
Click to expand...
The Federal Court will hold nearly $800,000 in trust from two life insurance polices for slain Brookfield mother Allison Baden-Clay until her husband, who is accused of her murder, faces trial.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au by Mark Oberhardt From: AAP February 06, 2013 3:35PM
THE combined $759,000 in benefits from ABC's insurance payout is frozen. Solicitor Paul Betros, representing the executor of ABC's estate said: ultimately the distribution of the funds could best be served by having the TAL and Suncorp money dealt with in one application
Mr Betros said he understood if Gerard Baden-Clay was found guilty of murder he could not benefit from the insurance money.
 
alioop said:
I am not surprised that the judge made the same decision as the Suncorp money.

Not a decision made in the interests of the girls at this stage, it is a decision that protects GBC's interests in the money, which considering he is innocent until proven guilty and was Allison's nominated beneficiary is in my opinion the right legal decision.

There will be a lot more to do with this money held by the court in the future regardless of the result of criminal charges as there are a number of legal issues that will impact on its ultimate beneficiary.
Click to expand...

Does that mean that people who are owed money by GBC and/or Allison may be paid before any consideration is given to who the remaining amount (if any) is to go to?


ETA: And, if so, I wonder if that means GBC's legal team could make a claim against the monies if GBC cannot/does not pay them what he owes for his defence?
 
If it is paid to Allison's estate then under legislation, proceeds of life insurances are exempt from her creditors.

If it is paid to GBC if he is not committed to trial or is found not guilty at trial, then it will be available as an asset of his to his creditors. Goodbye money. Good for his creditors but not good for the girls.

There are other issues as well but I don't want to go into them on open forum.
 
Alioop, are you able to answer some questions, but only if you feel comfortable doing so?
Could TM make a claim:
1/ As GBC allegedly owes her a substantial amount of money from a loan
and
2/ In her capacity as alleged publicly acknowledged mistress?

Thanks. I totally understand if you can't answer this.
This is all IMOO
 
Fuskier said:
The Federal Court will hold nearly $800,000 in trust from two life insurance polices for slain Brookfield mother Allison Baden-Clay until her husband, who is accused of her murder, faces trial.
Click to expand...

If it earns interest while it is held, that would be quite nice! ...but then I guess there would be some admin fees to be covered.
 
Couldbe said:
If it earns interest while it is held, that would be quite nice! ...but then I guess there would be some admin fees to be covered.
Click to expand...

just heard by another taxt....funds frozen.........till after trial....just what has been reported to me....:jail:
 
Oz Jen said:
Alioop, are you able to answer some questions, but only if you feel comfortable doing so?
Could TM make a claim:
1/ As GBC allegedly owes her a substantial amount of money from a loan
and AS A CREDITOR OF GBC SHE CAN MAKE A CLAIM AGAINST HIM FOR THE AMOUNT OWING BUT ONLY OUT OF HIS PERSONAL ASSETS, NOT FROM ANY LIFE INSURANCE COMPONENT OF ALLISON'S ESTATE ASSETS. SO IF HE ENDS UP RECEIVING THE INSURANCE MONEY (IF NOT GUILTY VERDICT) THEN THAT MONEY WILL BE HIS PERSONAL ASSET AND AVAILABLE TO CREDITORS INCLUDING TM.
2/ In her capacity as alleged publicly acknowledged mistress? NO, THIS IS NOT RELEVANT TO ANY CLAIM SHE HAS. SHE IS NOT HIS DEFACTO SO SHE WOULDN'T HAVE RIGHTS TO PART OF HIS ASSETS IN THAT RESPECT.

Thanks. I totally understand if you can't answer this.
This is all IMOO
Click to expand...

Excuse the capitals, but I thought my responses would be easier to read if caps and bold.
 
alioop said:
I am not surprised that the judge made the same decision as the Suncorp money.

Not a decision made in the interests of the girls at this stage, it is a decision that protects GBC's interests in the money, which considering he is innocent until proven guilty and was Allison's nominated beneficiary is in my opinion the right legal decision.

There will be a lot more to do with this money held by the court in the future regardless of the result of criminal charges as there are a number of legal issues that will impact on its ultimate beneficiary.
Click to expand...

The very action of "going for the money" appears to me, a sign of guilt. Taking the matter to court seems beyond belief.
It advertises to all and sundry that this is where priorities actually lie.
Especially if this is the very reason Allison lost her life.
To me this is a significant statement all by itself.
Puts a whole new meaning to "business as usual."
Alioop, Might this be taken into account when he goes to trial?
 
Interesting, this article says that there could be three potential claimants to the life insurance money.

The Federal Court in Brisbane on Wednesday heard that there could be three potential claimants to the $412,267 from a TAL Life Limited life insurance policy in the name of Mrs Baden-Clay, including Mr Baden-Clay.
Click to expand...

http://www.news.com.au/national/sec...rds-murder-trial/story-fndo4ckr-1226571901396


Guessing that one would be GBC, and one would be Allison's estate (Dickies for the children) .... wonder who the third one is?

Perhaps the insurance company can claim the money back if they can prove there was a lie on the original application (eg. inflated income), as this article states http://money.msn.com/health-and-lif...spx?post=b722170d-637a-4a33-bfc8-3eb88e053bbd ..... or maybe the bankruptcy court, if GBC files for bankruptcy while in jail (can he do that)?


(Alioop, I know you can't go into more detail in an open forum, not aiming this post at you - I'm just speculating aloud here :) )
 
LadyBird1 said:
The very action of "going for the money" appears to me, a sign of guilt. Taking the matter to court seems beyond belief.
It advertises to all and sundry that this is where priorities actually lie.
Especially if this is the very reason Allison lost her life.
To me this is a significant statement all by itself.
Puts a whole new meaning to "business as usual."
Alioop, Might this be taken into account when he goes to trial?
Click to expand...

LB I don't think there is any doubt that the police case is that one of his motives is that he killed Allison to collect on her insurances. His behaviour in notifying those insurance companies and putting in claims as a matter of urgent haste as well as asking for an urgent death certificate to be issued is part of their evidence to support this. It is not usual behaviour for a grieving husband to act in such haste. I have never seen anything like this in my years of collecting life insurance policies. So yes, this will be absolutely be part of the case against him at the committal and, if he is committed, then at the trial.
 
SouthAussie said:
Interesting, this article says that there could be three potential claimants to the life insurance money.



http://www.news.com.au/national/sec...rds-murder-trial/story-fndo4ckr-1226571901396


Guessing that one would be GBC, and one would be Allison's estate (Dickies for the children) .... wonder who the third one is?

Perhaps the insurance company can claim the money back if they can prove there was a lie on the original application (eg. inflated income), as this article states http://money.msn.com/health-and-lif...spx?post=b722170d-637a-4a33-bfc8-3eb88e053bbd ..... or maybe the bankruptcy court, if GBC files for bankruptcy while in jail (can he do that)?


(Alioop, I know you can't go into more detail in an open forum, not aiming this post at you - I'm just speculating aloud here :) )
Click to expand...

Its ok to ask, the third one is the girls ( by a legal guardian) directly, being not via the estate. Re the lying on policy application question that is not relevant here as Suncorp and now TAL have admitted liability to payout and in fact have done so. They just wanted to ask the court to direct them who to pay it to.

That link is very interesting as it states that GBC and Allison were joint owners of the insurance policy and there was no nominated beneficiary. If correct, that changes things a little and also could be the reason that the money wasn't ordered to be paid to Allison's estate. I had thought that Allison owned the policy herself and GBC was nominated beneficiary. When people own an asset jointly, they each own the whole asset not say a half share each. So if one of the joint owners dies, the surviving joint owner continues to retain ownership of the whole asset. All the joint owner has to do is prove the person's death by a death certificate to get the asset in their own name or collect the proceeds of it as the surviving joint owner.

The other way to own assets by more than one owner is as tenants in common in whatever shares they decide such as in equal shares or a quarter/3 quarters etc. When one of those owners dies, their share in that asset falls into their estate for distribution under their will if they have one, and the other owner continues to own their shareholding.

So if the insurance policy and maybe the Suncorp one too, was owned jointly by Allison and GBC then it made it a lot easier for GBC to claim on the policy when he did in his capacity as surviving owner and nothing to do with being executor of Allison's estate. If GBC is found guilty then the law sorts out the joint ownership by treating the person who unlawfully killed their joint owner, as if they died first. So GBC would be treated as dying before Allison and then as surviving joint owner Allison becomes sole owner of the insurance and then on her death, it becomes an asset of her estate and would bypass GBC and go to the girls.

If GBC is not committed or is found not guilty at trial then he would be legally entitled to the money as the surviving joint owner.
 
Obsessor said:
Redlightthroughpaper, if I ask you anything you're uncomfortable with, please feel free to ignore the question. I completely understand (if one possibly could) how sensitive this situation is, for you and others close to Allison and GBC.

I wanted to just ask, if I could, how would you describe the gut feeling that the people who knew the BC's had in the early days of the search, right from when it came over the radio that a Brookefield mother of three was missing? I remember when I heard about it, I pricked my ears, because the announcement said the mother of three was last seen by her husband when she went for a walk at 10 pm, and then he went to bed. He reported her missing the next morning. I immediately thought that sounded odd.

My question is, did the people who knew Allison have a slight hunch, like a thought in the back of their mind, that GBC was possibly behind it? or was there complete faith in the gone for a walk story, for a few days at least?

Actually I remember too the reporting of her depression, by OW, but other reports, from people we now know to be Allisons friends, saying she would never have left her girls. What were those people thinking had happened? Fallen down a hole?

I'm just curious, as even though I'm sure no-one ever saw him as the murderous type, did they see him as 100% devoted and caring, and honest, or not quite?
I know there were many people who knew he was conducting an affair behind Allisons back, but there were probably many who didn't know about that. Did there seem to be an element of doubt about the walk theory?
I suppose no-one would have been game to say even if they did have that gut feeling at the time.

Like I said, ignore fully if you like or just anwer in any way you're comfortable.

Thanks.

I should add, that my question is really just a personal enquiry so as I can learn to better protect myself from the people that are potential killers that mingle amongst us in society.
Click to expand...


I can't speak for others, but my gut feeling when I first heard ABC was missing was that she had been badly hurt somehow (fallen, hit her head, broken both legs, something like that). I remember feeling quite sick once it started raining because she still hadn’t been found.
After the first few days I started to think perhaps she had been abducted or something, but was confused that there were no warnings not to go walking alone in the area etc. I must admit I started locking my doors at night and didn’t feel comfortable for a while.
There was though, a LOT of gossip going around after the first day or two about what had happened to her and a lot of that was that GBC was responsible. Most of this gossip came from people who didn’t know them very well, but after a few days, I did hear some of it from people who knew them just as well as I did, too.
At the time I just thought it was really nasty gossip and couldn't comprehend why people would say such things when the poor mans wife was missing. But a few weeks later, I also couldn't comprehend why the police would have arrested him for murder unless they had some pretty serious evidence that he did it!
I don’t believe ABC would have purposefully left her girls, no.
I had heard via the gossip mill of the affair with TM (I didn’t hear it from ABC or GBC - it’s not exactly dinner table conversation), but I was also under the impression that it had ended about 6 months before ABC went missing, when TM had left C21. I had no idea it was still ongoing and whenever I overheard people gossip about it after that, I had assumed they were just talking ‘old news’.
I knew nothing of the other two affairs and had heard no gossip about them either until the Brookfield show last year.
Don’t know if any of that is helpful to you, but hope it answers your questions. :)
 
Redlight, thankyou sooo much for that lengthy answer. I really appreciate your honesty and invaluable inside knowledge.
Poor, poor Allison.
I can totally imagine how awful it felt when it started raining. The helplessness and despair would have been absolutely gutting. Just not knowing and thinking she needed help... tragic. So sad.

Your answer more than answers my questions. You have given an incredible insight into what it was really like to be there at the time and to know the family. Everything you said made so much sense. I could well imagine thinking all the things you were.
Thankyou so much for sharing.
 
alioop said:
Its ok to ask, the third one is the girls ( by a legal guardian) directly, being not via the estate. Re the lying on policy application question that is not relevant here as Suncorp and now TAL have admitted liability to payout and in fact have done so. They just wanted to ask the court to direct them who to pay it to.

That link is very interesting as it states that GBC and Allison were joint owners of the insurance policy and there was no nominated beneficiary. If correct, that changes things a little and also could be the reason that the money wasn't ordered to be paid to Allison's estate. I had thought that Allison owned the policy herself and GBC was nominated beneficiary. When people own an asset jointly, they each own the whole asset not say a half share each. So if one of the joint owners dies, the surviving joint owner continues to retain ownership of the whole asset. All the joint owner has to do is prove the person's death by a death certificate to get the asset in their own name or collect the proceeds of it as the surviving joint owner.

The other way to own assets by more than one owner is as tenants in common in whatever shares they decide such as in equal shares or a quarter/3 quarters etc. When one of those owners dies, their share in that asset falls into their estate for distribution under their will if they have one, and the other owner continues to own their shareholding.

So if the insurance policy and maybe the Suncorp one too, was owned jointly by Allison and GBC then it made it a lot easier for GBC to claim on the policy when he did in his capacity as surviving owner and nothing to do with being executor of Allison's estate. If GBC is found guilty then the law sorts out the joint ownership by treating the person who unlawfully killed their joint owner, as if they died first. So GBC would be treated as dying before Allison and then as surviving joint owner Allison becomes sole owner of the insurance and then on her death, it becomes an asset of her estate and would bypass GBC and go to the girls.

If GBC is not committed or is found not guilty at trial then he would be legally entitled to the money as the surviving joint owner.
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to explain. :)
So the joint ownership enabled GBC to skip the will/estate/beneficiary aspect, and hypothetically more quickly access the insurance payout (unless, of course, he happened to get arrested for murder first ... and forgot that he needed the actual death certificate first, not just reports from MSM to prove his wife's death!)
 
And Alioop, you are amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thankyou soooo much for your incredible contributions and knowledge.

My jaw continues to drop with every twist in this sordid tail.
Your interpretation for those of us that haven't got legal/finance minds is gold.


I love this forum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 164 more.
Total: 1,185 (members: 165, guests: 1,020)

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
1,020
Total visitors
1,185
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,778
Messages
17,958,704
Members
228,606
Latest member
JerseyLizard
Back
Top