Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, 43, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 - #7

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's pretty crap to be honest. Goes on about Mother's Day and handmade cards and a family get together. Does mention that ABC's dad is turning 72 today, but apart from that, nothing that you can't read online.

Thanks jlydia, but they don't have the entire article online, only a portion of it.

I was just wondering if she went into anymore detail about Allison's plans around that time E.G sleepover.
 
Thanks jlydia, but they don't have the entire article online, only a portion of it.

I was just wondering if she went into anymore detail about Allison's plans around that time E.G sleepover.


Nothing at all. I'll try and retype it . ..
 
"temporary insanity" is probably better called provocation, think he may have left his run for that a little too late, he would have been better cooperating immediately, think provocation defence has been modified recently
 
I figured tinypic is faster.. .

3582om9.jpg
 
3.22 The Queensland provision specifies three elements for murder to be
reduced to manslaughter. The defendant must kill:
(1) ‘in the heat of passion’;
(2) in circumstances where the passion has been caused by a ‘sudden
provocation’; and
(3) before there is time for the defendant’s ‘passion to cool’.
 
3.35 The statistical information available to the Commission suggests that in
Queensland two main groups take advantage of the plea of provocation. The
first group are men who kill a partner (or former partner or rival) at or after
separation. In all these cases the central dynamic is the exercise by the partner
(or former partner) of her right to personal autonomy and the man’s denial of
her right to autonomy.
67
 
3.35 The statistical information available to the Commission suggests that in
Queensland two main groups take advantage of the plea of provocation. The
first group are men who kill a partner (or former partner or rival) at or after
separation. In all these cases the central dynamic is the exercise by the partner
(or former partner) of her right to personal autonomy and the man’s denial of
her right to autonomy.
67
 
This was my point, hence, my use of the word 'pedantic'. GBC's counsel IS an SC, not a QC in the pedantic sense of the word, though in all practicalities, this is the same thing.

This was not intended to be, nor was, 'authoritative misinformation' - I prefaced and qualified my comment clearly. My point was to illustrate his counsel's proper title i.e this is a 'fact we have to work with'.

This is the terminology now used, except for those barristers who where already a QC before the change was made and they could choose to either retain the title or move to SC.

Woah back a bit next time and take a closer look.

Selective quoting ..... Read your full post, fairly apparent you didn't know the difference and you had attempted to correct another ..... No big deal
 
I figured tinypic is faster.. .

3582om9.jpg

... Gerard will have to step up now and play both roles in the future ???? ....

Does the family believe that he will be around for a long time ?????
 
I've wrangled my way out of jury duty several times but I'd quite like to be involved in this one. Mainly to find out the facts that we wish we all knew!
We might never find out the facts. GBC does not have to speak. So accomplices may choose to remain silent too. The onus of proof on evidence gained is on the Police and the Prosecution at Court. Methinks The Law needs to be reviewed and changed.
 
... Gerard will have to step up now and play both roles in the future ???? ....

Does the family believe that he will be around for a long time ?????

What the...? :waitasec:
 
I'm more surprised by what wasn't in the article. Who does she think did it? Was it usual for ABC to take night walks? What ABC happy because of the separation? What were the last texts with ABC? What has been her opinion of GBC?

I think the friend has a lot more to say but none of it can in all likelihood, be published at this stage. :waitasec:
 
3.22 The Queensland provision specifies three elements for murder to be
reduced to manslaughter. The defendant must kill:
(1) ‘in the heat of passion’;
(2) in circumstances where the passion has been caused by a ‘sudden
provocation’; and
(3) before there is time for the defendant’s ‘passion to cool’.

The question here is "how long is enough time for the passion to cool" ... hitting someone over the head once (which takes a few seconds) versus strangling (which takes minutes) ... would the "mode" by which someone was killed have a bearing? I guess it would.
 
Selective quoting ..... Read your full post, fairly apparent you didn't know the difference and you had attempted to correct another ..... No big deal


My 'full post' and my explanation support one another.

But what is 'fairly apparent' is that you:

1.don't know the meaning of 'pedantic'.

2. don't know when to apologise, when clearly, an apology was required.

Sure ... no big deal, just your big ego.
 
My 'full post' and my explanation support one another.

But what is 'fairly apparent' is that you:

1.don't know the meaning of 'pedantic'.

2. don't know when to apologise, when clearly, an apology was required.

Sure ... no big deal, just your big ego.

Common kids, stop the fighting, it's Mother's Day!! :peace:
 
I understand exactly what you are saying, however, there is always someone who has to do the so called "dirty/ugly jobs" in our society. Also, in this country the Law works on the basis that you are "presumed innocent" and as such, the prosecution has to prove otherwise. I don't envy the role of a defence lawyer ... it must be terribly difficult for them to have to keep quiet about what they know, but I do understand it. Many innocent people have ended up in jail for long periods of time, but now thanks to DNA and other modern technologies, they are proven innocent. Imaging their defence team, believing that the person is innocent, how they must feel when they loose their cases. I'm sure defence lawyers have a conscience and are not inhumane, but they have to abide by what the Law stipulates. It goes both ways.

I think because of why we are here ( the awful thing that has happened to Allison) the 'emotional influence' plays a major part in all of the judgements I make. Wrong, I know.
I agree - it is awful to think that people have spent many years in prison for crimes they did not commit. Thank goodness for forensics - help in proving the innocent are innocent - and the guilty are guilty!
I hope and pray there is enough solid evidence ( forensics, an accomplice willing to point the finger ' I was there, saw him/her do it' and admission of guilt!) in order to get the right result in this case, and that the sentence they receive fits the crime that they have committed.

Send them where the sun don't shine, for a very long time!

OMG - imagine if I were called up for jury duty on this case!! I would be lynched - 'she's got the murderer hung, drawn and quartered before they have opened the doors' - just joking!

Because of the attention it has received - would the case go to trial elsewhere in Australia?

Thanks, Caseload!
 
I'm more surprised by what wasn't in the article. Who does she think did it? Was it usual for ABC to take night walks? What ABC happy because of the separation? What were the last texts with ABC? What has been her opinion of GBC?

I think the friend has a lot more to say but none of it can in all likelihood, be published at this stage. :waitasec:

In the online portion she says Ms Walker said one of the last times she had coffee with her best friend; there was no sign of trouble.

``She said things were good. She was happy,'' Mrs Walker said.

``It (her death) was a complete shock to all of us.''
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
77
Guests online
3,316
Total visitors
3,393

Forum statistics

Threads
592,284
Messages
17,966,658
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top