Australia Australia - Lynette Dawson, 34, Sydney, Jan 1982 *Arrest* #2

Discussion in '1980's Missing' started by imamaze, Jul 14, 2010.

  1. alj65

    alj65 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    429
    Likes Received:
    333
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I'm nearly 60 and don't know how to drive, it's simply something that has never interested me, nor was it something I needed to do (I don't have kids). Hubby usually drives me where I want to go. But then again, he has never dropped me off at a bus stop to go shopping and not driven me a few KMs further to the actual shops I wanted to go to.
    Honestly, his story is such a crock, it has more holes than my dodgy crocheting.
     
    Cagney&Lacey, Estelle, k-mac and 9 others like this.
  2. Via Marple

    Via Marple Here to learn how devious minds work

    Messages:
    748
    Likes Received:
    4,077
    Trophy Points:
    93
    That's why he has now come up with a new story, with his lawyer and some "credible witnesses" - she had run away to become a nurse at Curl Curl!

    I hope the police is able to tear apart that story... After wasting more of our tax money.
     
  3. DRT

    DRT Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    841
    Likes Received:
    2,070
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Of course if she was a nurse, she would have had tax taken out of pay which would have been reported to the ATO, even if she didn't complete a tax return.
     
  4. SouthAussie

    SouthAussie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,917
    Likes Received:
    17,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If I had to guess, I would guess that the next hypothetical scenario is going to be that Lyn had probably changed her name. So she could live close by with her religious group, and ignore all of her family and her children.
    And that will be why there are no records of her anywhere.

    I think Dawson's lawyer is trying to put reasonable doubt out there, prior to the trial. In the hope that he can influence people, even though any jury is 'supposed' to disregard anything heard pre-trial.

    If what he is doing is not breaching sub judice, it certainly seems unethical, to me. But perhaps he was chosen for that reason, after all his client has been said to be totally unethical when a school teacher.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2019
    Estelle, they'll get you, DRT and 5 others like this.
  5. JLZ

    JLZ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,315
    Likes Received:
    5,450
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If Lyn changed her name legally, I think there would be records. If she changed her name informally, she would still have had to use her old name with government organizations etc. So the evidence that she is dead would not be weakened by the hypothesis that she changed her name IMO.
     
  6. SouthAussie

    SouthAussie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,917
    Likes Received:
    17,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. Lyn didn't change her name.
    My statement was merely indicating that could be the next seed of doubt that they try to plant. Because I highly doubt that Lyn's name is going to be found among the hospital staff at the time of the 'sightings'.

    While a jury is to disregard anything they hear about a case, prior to the trial, there is no way that some things wont affect some jury members imo ... even subconciously.
     
  7. JLZ

    JLZ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,315
    Likes Received:
    5,450
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't suppose anyone here is sympathetic to the theory that Lyn is alive. The risk for the defence of putting easily demolished arguments is that the public and the jury decide they're full of you-know-what and stop listening.
     
  8. alj65

    alj65 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    429
    Likes Received:
    333
    Trophy Points:
    63
    If Lyn was actually alive, I'd be curious as to why Chris and family haven't attempted to find her, especially after several so called sighting. All the recent publicity would be an ideal time to put out an appeal to find her and get back in touch, if not for only proving his innocence. Why is there no interest in finding her? IMO, from the get go, he has seemed confident she was never coming back.
     
  9. Trooper

    Trooper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,732
    Likes Received:
    6,287
    Trophy Points:
    113

    So confident that he moved his 16 yr old student girlfriend right into his and Lynn's bedroom on the MONDAY after Lynn's disappearance on the Saturday morning.

    Only someone who actually knew precisely and exactly where Lynn was and knew precisely and exactly why it would be absolutely safe and sound to move the girlfriend into the bedroom would do that. The killer.

    And where was Lynn going to 'come back' to? with Joanne ensconced in Lynn's bedroom , her whole house, actually, where exactly was Lynn supposed to return to? the shed?? . the garage ? what? Where was Joanne going to be shifted to if Lynn came back and set up a bit of a fuss, a bit stroppy about Joanna's grip on the whole household? .. .

    Chris never mentions this aspect.
     
  10. k-mac

    k-mac Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,614
    Likes Received:
    10,431
    Trophy Points:
    113
    it really is an enormous elephant in the room troop isn't it :confused:
     
  11. SouthAussie

    SouthAussie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,917
    Likes Received:
    17,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    IIRC Joanne was even given Lyn's rings to wear. No expectation of Lyn returning imo. Not even a hope.

    "Oh Joanne, Lyn is back. Can you please take her rings off and give them to her?"
     
  12. Trooper

    Trooper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,732
    Likes Received:
    6,287
    Trophy Points:
    113
    an entire herd, K-Mac.

    It seems to me to all the brothers, Chris, Paul, Peter, all were utterly confident and prepared with the 'running away' story, well, Peter had a MIL who did the same thing , an incredible coincidence. You wouldn't believe it, ey?....

    Chris throwing in the dead rabbit of the bloke with the religious angle was the sign of an over confident man, particularly had the police looked for this bloke visiting other lonely housewives in the area. ..

    They got away with it..
     
  13. DRT

    DRT Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    841
    Likes Received:
    2,070
    Trophy Points:
    93
    The MIL had actually left the family home before going missing and just wasn't at the boarding house she was staying at when visited. She would have taken clothes and rings. Choice all the way. There was those phone calls of course ... that only Chris heard. The amazing thing with all these mystery sightings of Lyn, Chris was still the last person to allegedly speak to her post disappearance.

    REVEALED: A relative of Chris Dawson disappeared 22 years before his wife Lynette - and his lawyer claims the eerie coincidence proves 'these things do happen'
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2019
    Estelle, they'll get you, JLZ and 7 others like this.
  14. Via Marple

    Via Marple Here to learn how devious minds work

    Messages:
    748
    Likes Received:
    4,077
    Trophy Points:
    93
    I think the question is, now that the Dawson team is finally aware that Lyn had "run away" to Curl Curl.... shouldn't they be doing their own investigation to look for her or at least her presence around Curl Curl at that time? That would be essential to Chris's claim of innocence.

    Surely they can't rely on the evil police to follow up for them?
     
    DRT, Trooper, alj65 and 3 others like this.
  15. SouthAussie

    SouthAussie Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,917
    Likes Received:
    17,652
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unfortunately, all the defence has to do is put reasonable doubt in two jury members heads and that's it. Dawson walks on the murder charge.
    Positive proof is not necessarily required, depending on the headspace of each and every jury member.
    And, quite honestly, it seems to me that the defence are trying to stir reasonable doubt already, prior to the trial.

    NSW now can use a majority decision in all of their serious-crime jury trials.



    Section 55F of the Jury Act now allows for ‘majority verdicts’ in the following circumstances:
    • Where a unanimous verdict has not been reached after the jurors have deliberated for a period of at least 8 hours, and the court considers that reasonable time has been given considering the nature and complexity of the case, and
    • The court is satisfied after questioning one or more of the jurors on oath that it is unlikely a unanimous verdict will be reached.
    ‘Majority verdict’ is defined as:
    • a verdict agreed to by 11 jurors where the jury consists of 12 persons, or
    • a verdict agreed to by 10 jurors where the jury consists of 11 persons.
    The judge is not to advise the jury of its ability to return a majority verdict before determining that a unanimous verdict is unlikely to be reached.
    Majority Verdicts in New South Wales
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2019
    Oz Jen, Estelle, Via Marple and 6 others like this.
  16. they'll get you

    they'll get you CHRIS. P. BACON

    Messages:
    10,264
    Likes Received:
    19,807
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I love your thinking Troops.
     

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice