Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, 43, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 - #15

[minni]

Hello everyone. This is my first post, fingers-crossed

I've been trying to guess what the detectives on this case might be doing, so I went looking for a description of police procedures, and found a paper which seems to do a good job of explaining the typical stages in Australian criminal investigations.

Some points it makes:
- investigations need to clear the innocent, not just establish the guilt of the offender;
- investigators draw up a profile of the victim(s), including information about personal history, family, financial interests, and a timeline of activities during their final 24 hours;
- they prioritise suspects according to evidence and potential motives;
- they might try to use the media in a tactical way;
- and good investigators build up a rapport with suspects.

See:
"The criminal investigator" by Terry Goldsworthy, who was a Detective Senior Sergeant with Queensland Police when the paper was published in 2009.
This link goes straight to the PDF, but if you'd prefer to check the abstract before downloading, try this epublications@bond introductory page.

thanks Stormbird...that is so very helpful and something I need to keep in mind whenever I get impatient!!

Welcome

 

[LouH]

Have just spent hours catching up again, gee this forum moves fast!

A couple of thoughts that I haven't seen mentioned by anyone yet:

Time frame is probably based on when ABC was last sighted. Last confirmed sighting would probably be the hairdressers so if this was say 730pm that opens the door for her murder to occur as early as 8pm.

Secondly there could have been a sighting of her car going around the roundabout to go home fro the hairdressers as well, again confirming the approx time of last sighting.

I wonder whether the police have asked what treatments ABC had done at the salon? If she had her hair dyed or even a treatment done she would have those chemicals fresh in her hair. That would mean that if they could somehow obtain hair from one of the cars that specifically showed that chemical to be present then they could establish she was in the car/s after her treatment and thus, perhaps, implicate the killer.

Timeline in my opinion:
Last sighting at 730-745pm
Cars seen at roundabout at 1130pm by CCTV
Cars again seen at 4am by CCTV

I have been thinking about the signs police saw on arrival at 730am. I think the combination of his facial injuries and something broken made them suspicious. Perhaps something major was broken that couldn't be hidden- a TV maybe or a door? may have accounted for their suspicions.

Finally I have no logical reason to suspect this but my theory is the kids were in the house on the night of the murder. Remember OW was in Brisbane at the time? I think she was at Nigelaine home with her kids, thus taking up space the girls would have otherwise occupied.

Oh and one more thing- OW is so familiar to me but I still can't place her. When the story initially broke I googled her and initially thought she was on a reality TV show but that's clearly not the link. There is something 'known' to me about her but for the life of me don't know what.

 

[Limaes]

wow that really is an interesting thing to mull over (and pretty sad ) but it would indicate she wasn't in the water in your scenario...the fact that you feel it was both knees seems significant to me because if she washed ashore I just cant see her ending up in such a neat position (sorry this sounds heartless discussing this) also, it backs up your theory really well...can you try and pick apart the other possibilities I posted a couple of posts ago? Im going to be going over this all night now!

It is sad, imagine what the Investigators go through when trying to solve this. I think they know what the COD is and have known since the autopsy, they just can't prove who did it yet. Maybe they were hoping DNA that was tested belonged to the killer and it has turned out to belong to Allison?

I'm not saying I don't think she was in the water, she may have been. I'm saying that if she was then perhaps she was washed ashore 3 days or less after being placed there. I will look for the footage I saw over the weekend and link it for you to form an opinion.

 

[minni]

Hello folks,

I've managed with all my willpower to stay quiet for over a week now - I was hoping the "imminent arrest" would have put all this speculation to rest by now... Sadly we are all still here waiting for answers.

I may have been put in the dog box with old Scraps for my last post (now deleted) - I'm not entirely sure as I have only logged back in just now. Sorry to all (and our extremenly tolerant mods) if I stepped over the line with that last one, since deleted... As most would have realised it was a very "tongue in cheek" summary of the evidence against the main suspect, intended to highlight how difficult it might be for QPS.

I totally understand the acute focus on the main suspect - particularly as we have no one else to focus on. I just think a lot of the evidence some are relying on is so "circumstantial" it is a real worry if that is all the QPS have as well.

I also keep thinking about the following which seems to have been overlooked long ago by all: "Police maintain Mr Baden-Clay, 41, a great-grandson of Scouts founder Lord Baden-Powell, is not a person of interest". http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...lison-baden-clay/story-e6frg6nf-1226342663519

I haven't heard/seen any changes to this since. So perhaps the "suspect" is not the suspect as far as QPS are concerned? And for the record I have no issue with the suspect engaging lawyers - he was always going to be considered a suspect rightly or wrongly and I would do the same (engage lawyers). The press have certainly toned down their innuendo since the suspect appointed an SC.

So to sum up I really worry that we are all on the wrong track and in the interest of the victim and her children we should keep an open mind at the very least. A good sleuth always looks at alternate possibilities and rules them out methodically. Sometimes the correct answer is not always the obvious one.

To that end I have a new (albeit controversial) alternate theory if anyone is interested... I will just have to check the posting rules first on suggesting other suspects.

Toowong(s)

Hi again Toowong!! lets hear it...I constantly alternate between your said 'worry that we are on the wrong track' and not having any other direction to look, so bring it on

 

[grannie]

Although you can't see clearly, it looks like the knees were in a bent position.

Essentially, the action of rigor mortis is to begin a process where the muscles in the body begin to stiffen. In most situations, the corpse will begin to undergo the process of rigor mortis at approx. 3 hours after death takes place. Now, I begin to doubt that Allison was taking a bath that night. She had her hair done that night, so I also doubt she went for walk at all (to sweat and make her hair wet) with her hair all nice and ready for the conference next day.

 

[frostythesnowman]

I set my washing machine to go on when it's convenient for me - via the delay button. Therefore, it could be possible for the machine to be doing Allison's washing the next morning, and it may not have been suss.

Where did a washing machine get mentioned? I am lost!:waitasec:

 

[minni]

Have just spent hours catching up again, gee this forum moves fast!

A couple of thoughts that I haven't seen mentioned by anyone yet:

Time frame is probably based on when ABC was last sighted. Last confirmed sighting would probably be the hairdressers so if this was say 730pm that opens the door for her murder to occur as early as 8pm.

Secondly there could have been a sighting of her car going around the roundabout to go home fro the hairdressers as well, again confirming the approx time of last sighting.

I wonder whether the police have asked what treatments ABC had done at the salon? If she had her hair dyed or even a treatment done she would have those chemicals fresh in her hair. That would mean that if they could somehow obtain hair from one of the cars that specifically showed that chemical to be present then they could establish she was in the car/s after her treatment and thus, perhaps, implicate the killer.

Timeline in my opinion:
Last sighting at 730-745pm
Cars seen at roundabout at 1130pm by CCTV
Cars again seen at 4am by CCTV

I have been thinking about the signs police saw on arrival at 730am. I think the combination of his facial injuries and something broken made them suspicious. Perhaps something major was broken that couldn't be hidden- a TV maybe or a door? may have accounted for their suspicions.

Finally I have no logical reason to suspect this but my theory is the kids were in the house on the night of the murder. Remember OW was in Brisbane at the time? I think she was at Nigelaine home with her kids, thus taking up space the girls would have otherwise occupied.

Oh and one more thing- OW is so familiar to me but I still can't place her. When the story initially broke I googled her and initially thought she was on a reality TV show but that's clearly not the link. There is something 'known' to me about her but for the life of me don't know what.

some one has talked about the chemicals from hair treatments and possible forensics in one of the cars in an earlier post, but good thinking, on you r other points I think the suspect observations at the house were more subtle (dont know why) but enough to feel wrong more than a big thing JMO

and WOW...I swear I feel that same familiarity you do towards OW. I actually got on FB to see what it could be but nothing...

 

[Limaes]

Essentially, the action of rigor mortis is to begin a process where the muscles in the body begin to stiffen. In most situations, the corpse will begin to undergo the process of rigor mortis at approx. 3 hours after death takes place. Now, I begin to doubt that Allison was taking a bath that night. She had her hair done that night, so I also doubt she went for walk at all (to sweat and make her hair wet) with her hair all nice and ready for the conference next day.

Yes, depending on the environment, it can begin at 2 hours after death. Which, imo, means that the killer didn't rush out and get rid of her. The planning and act of re-locating her took several hours.

Edited to add: which also means the killer had no fear of being caught with a dead body in those first few hours. JMO

I really hope this case isn't slipping away from Investigators

 

[minni]

Where did a washing machine get mentioned? I am lost!:waitasec:

sorry that was me, early in this thread, I talked about a woman who murdered her husband, called the police at 10pm to report him missing whilst he was out on his JOG, he was found 'dressed after being killed' and the police became suspicious because, although she was acting panicked and worried on the phone, when they got there she was doing a load of washing! seemed like a few similarities, I thought GBC might have had the machine on at 7.30 that morning and one of the officers might have thought it odd

 

[minni]

Yes, depending on the environment, it can begin at 2 hours after death. Which, imo, means that the killer didn't rush out and get rid of her. The planning and act of re-locating her took several hours.

Edited to add: which also means the killer had no fear of being caught with a dead body in those first few hours. JMO

I really hope this case isn't slipping away from Investigators

hence the back and forth through the roundabout for half the night, deciding and planning where and when to move the body

 

[CaseClosed]

thanks blue bottle, it was a crime investigation channel episode I watched and they said it made police very suspicious which got me thinking. But I have two points to make.

I am like you Blue Bottle, and mop at midnight, hang out washing at 3 in the morning, and usually always get up at 1 or 1.30 and have a coffee..strange yes , but I have insomnia. I too have teenagers, but also a 5 year old and the habits in my house are often out of whack and off routine, as I also have a husband who works away on fly in fly out jobs. So for me its not unusual and I wouldnt have thought of it until I saw the show.

But it did get me thinking after that, and I started imagining a white collar business type, with a lovely wife who has a little more extra time to do many of the household chores and manage the kids daily routines. (this frees up the busy 'suit' husband to really just put his time and effort into his work and any other extra curricular activities he happens to find time for (prick), also he was the managing director and I picture him as feeling a little self important and 'beneath throwing a load on' to help the missus........so with that in mind, I try and imagine him in a Mr Mom role...AND I CANT!!, but, its really how the police who turned up that day percieve what is normal and what is unnatural. Its possible they wouldn't notice it or find it that odd, but if they turned up with a cautious attitude based on previous DV's or something, they would surely take it into account.

I also do washing at midnight and sleep average 4-5 hours. But, back to the case, yes, I wonder how he is coping being a single dad to 3 young kids. I bet you, if he is the guilty party, he did not think about that aspect of life: without a wife to run the household and take care of the children! No time for affairs now!

 

[Toowong(s)]

Hello everyone. This is my first post, fingers-crossed

I've been trying to guess what the detectives on this case might be doing, so I went looking for a description of police procedures, and found a paper which seems to do a good job of explaining the typical stages in Australian criminal investigations.

Some points it makes:
- investigations need to clear the innocent, not just establish the guilt of the offender;
- investigators draw up a profile of the victim(s), including information about personal history, family, financial interests, and a timeline of activities during their final 24 hours;
- they prioritise suspects according to evidence and potential motives;
- they might try to use the media in a tactical way;
- and good investigators build up a rapport with suspects.

See:
"The criminal investigator" by Terry Goldsworthy, who was a Detective Senior Sergeant with Queensland Police when the paper was published in 2009.
This link goes straight to the PDF, but if you'd prefer to check the abstract before downloading, try this epublications@bond introductory page.

Great post Mr Percival - I have often wondered if the initial focus on GBS may have been as much about clearing him as anything else - he was always going to be near the top of the list of potential suspects. But perhaps after testing cars, testing the house, checking computers, etc QPS were satisfied he was not their man? If the "true" QPS suspect is someone else, perhaps that suspects defence in court could be implicating the last person to report seeing the victim alive - to create "reasonable doubt" in the mind of a jury. So it could be vital the QPS gather enough evidence to debunk this in court...

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

About the old man sitting at the bus stop at the Kenmore roundabout.

That came from the QPS facebook page. A woman mentioned it there and a reply came asking her to contact Crime Stoppers to report it, her post and response have since been deleted.

The link was on the Aussicriminals site (or was it this one) I woggle between both.

Katikutloose..did you see that post on the facebook page? The post I saw- and that has been discussed before, the lady posted that she saw something odd at a certain time(within the timeframe police are looking at). QPS told her to contact crimestoppers. Then her post was deleted. It did not say what she saw. So I think that maybe rumour that she said she saw that(unless it was a different post, but it sounds the same, and it is the one that has been discussed here)

 

[Limaes]

hence the back and forth through the roundabout for half the night, deciding and planning where and when to move the body

Now that you say that, I wonder if the killer or accomplice drove out to Kholo Creek or possibly even other locations to 'case' them first, without the body. Like a dry run, or deciding which location was the better option...hmmm :waitasec:

 

[Rudra]

Dear minni, mouse detective and all sleuthers here, we are all so affected by a terrible crime to an intelligent, accomplished mother, daughter, which I feel we all are too.

Crimes against women...now that is heinous and I think it is time that maybe Alison Sandy needs to do a crime reporters' article on this and stop being soooooooooo stymied by who ever is doing it.

A woman like this is a person like we all are and I AM SURE IT STEMS FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE in her upper middle class case too. IMO as I have to cover my *advertiser censored*.

Apologies, I don't post often, but try to read all the comments when I get the chance. I'm puzzled by the strong emphasis on DV in this case which has been brought up in many of the posts. I am not denying that DV may have been an issue in the marriage, and I am not denying that DV is a bad thing; but what confuses me is that it seems DV at times is being put forward for the motive of the murder, or even the cause of death.

DV may have resulted in ABC's death, but speaking technically it was not the cause of her death: cause of death would be a blow to the head; drowning, suffocation etc. An as yet we don't know what COD was.

A trickier question is whether DV by itself is the motivation for murder. I can see some people would believe it so; that there are men who are naturally inclined to inflicting violence on their spouses for the sole purpose of having control at any cost. But even then I would argue that DV is an outcome of a control issue. That is, the spouse who wants more control uses violence to get it. In fact there are many people who use violence to get control over others.

I think I am trying to say that when it comes down to the basics, someone wanted to get control over ABC, and they did. When it comes to motive, the question is why did they want / need that control over her?

I realise that this has been implicit in many of the discussions before, but I have never really seen the question of motive explored in detail so far.

 

[Radster]

Why can't the media cam snap him arriving and leaving TMs or with her at restaurants? Gosh we aren't allowed papparazi? JMO

I doubt they're brave enough for restaurants at this point, but they would definitely still be communicating. My guess is that they are still "on", whatever that means in the post-death of a spouse. If the info on other threads is true - that Toni had been largely embraced by GBC's family - then you'd have to think he'd still be feeling pretty emboldened about continuing the relationship in spite of everything else.

 

[mouse detective]

just thinking about location of GBC's new offices - didn't anyone tell GBC that two wongs don't make a right??!!

:rofl:

 

[Watsonian Institute]

... he would have to come out and show that what they have said isn't true ...

I'm sure I'll get some words of wisdom from Watsonian Institute or his kinsmen on this one....

Here is a link, but just to preview, the information above is incorrect: no offence intended.
http://www.qpilch.org.au/resources/factsheets/Defamation.htm

Information is a news organisation's trade, so they're extremely knowledgeable about this particular area. News organisations have highly efficient lawyers to advise in these matters. Furthermore, journalists also study media law as part of their education, so they are aware of their reporting requirements. This is a link to an academic paper written by a media law expert, which outlines some approaches to teaching media law to journalists, but if it's of no interest, just disregard it: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/LegEdRev/1995/3.html

This is one outlining issues in layperson's terms: http://www.upstart.net.au/2012/01/13/*****y-blogger-or-defamatory-defendant/

Writers such as amateur bloggers, people who post on forums, and people who use social media do not have the same resources at their disposal as news organisations, even though they are subject to the same laws: http://journlaw.com/2011/08/16/why-...facebook-and-twitter-about-the-morcombe-case/

Kimster prefers all more-specific information related to this topic to be put in the "jury room" forum, so I won't post anything further on this topic.

Cheers

 

[linette]

The edit button is my friend!

haha, mine would be... if only it would actually work!! Trust me, I need the use of this edit function.

 

[Berry]

I always think about that. It can be stated as fact that first officers to arrive observed something/s that alarmed them enough to contact Detectives straight away, but what was it besides the scratches on his face?

Was the house too clean?
Was there a certain smell?
Was their bed made? (this could mean that Police believe it was never slept in that night, not proof of anything but enough to raise more suspicions)
Did he react to them the same way he did to that interview?

The Police would now know what she was wearing when she had her hair done. I wonder if they found those same clothes and where? Were they on the bedroom floor?...on the bathroom floor?...in the dirty clothes basket? There is just so much we don't know. imo, the location of those clothes, and the position they were in would likely tell if she changed into the 'walking outfit' or somebody else dressed her in them.

Also, wonder what she normally wore to bed,pyjamas?...nightgown?...trackies and a t-shirt?

Well I feel initial observations would not need to venture to the dirty washing or the bedroom.......I think it was a visual 'smack in the face real unspecified observation' to immediately ring the boss to refer them to detectives and then crime scene warrant my friend.....