Australia - Warriena Wright, 26, dies in balcony fall, Surfers Paradise, Aug 2014 #9

[Karinna]

J has given directions, you should take into account WW level of intoxication with respect to her judgement. There is no suggestion of any experience with heights by her. The prosecution adduced evidence she was terrified. If you want to play Juror then you need to decide if that fear was force enough for her to have no option that to climb over. This is what jurors are asked to do, it is not helpful to make up issues of mental health here that simply are not relevant, of consider what any of us, or what GT or WW should have or could have done. J has also instructed to ignore that GT left building and ate a pizza.

BBM, In that case arent the jury being asked to speculate what was in WW's head at that point in time as to the reason what choice she felt she needed to take for what happened? And wouldn't that be speculation seeing as the jury don't know the answer to that?

 

[fairydust]

BBM. Neither have I. I doubt there will be any events similar where an adult woman goes as an Invitee to a complete stranger's Unit within minutes of meeting him, and buys booze on the way, and then takes evocative selfies or participates in them - posing away, texts their Sister about hooking up with some Australian equivalent of some TV Show Hero by way of some boast, drinks that booze and more, gets involved in some sex play acting, has sex (I assume) goes 'psycho,' - is then made well aware their behaviour has become unacceptable to the Host and yet then starts tossing rocks at her host and around his Unit, gets subdued by him, unlawfully strikes out at the Host with a metal object (potentially mortally, or causing GBH,) gets put by the Host on a balcony where they are each safe, and then they die because by sheer irrational decision, said adult woman decides to climb off a 14th Floor balcony. Happens all the time, I suppose......does it?

That was an excellent post Elde, an excellent summation of the situation.

 

[CleverKnot]

Apparently, he was unable to even manage to open the front door to let Warriena go home. So tying Warriena up was probably out of the question for his abilities at the time.

Much easier to 'chuck' her on the balcony, lock her out there, then do whatever it was that he did in the 50 secs before he called his lawyer.

Again, even the judge recognized you cannot hindsight judge this like he had time to plan, consider all the options and all the possible outcomes, weigh which was right, wrong, and maybe grey area... then act accordingly.

He was in a physical altercation, and rather than choosing to win that physical fight by knockout or submission, he separated himself from her in likely the quickest, and easiest way possible.

As well, at that point, he likely wanted the support of all the witnesses a loud woman on a balcony 14 stories up at 2 am in the morning would create.

 

[John Dillinger]

That has never been in dispute by me. She was blind drunk, she was terrified, she was oxygen deprived, she had been roughed up, she was a long way from home.

She needed care .... not confinement ... the resident who invited her to his home's care .... using his duty of care.

Which is why it frustrates me when others on this thread keep expecting her to have acted as if she was sober and unafraid of the person inside.

Tostee removed her to the balcony so she would stop being violent towards him, so why would she be scared. If she had ran to the balcony then closed the door behind herself with Tostee in pursuit behind her, then this would cause fear and a reason to climb te balcony.

I dont see if tostee locked the door why she would be scared, hes locking the door to prevent further contact between the two.

<modsnip>

 

[PrimeSuspect]

He stopped the violence.

What he was going to do next would have been witnessed by umpteen neighbors, quite obviously, because he just put an angry, loud woman, on the balcony at 2 am in the morning.

It is almost preposterous to think he wasn't aware that everyone around his unit, was now going to be involved. Who hasn't had a loud guest or issue in their apartment condo, and immediately thought about what the neighbors are going to think and do?

Imo, Tostee's only concern was Warriena calling the police. Tostee could come up with a pack of lies for his neighbours, they're not an issue for a young guy.

 

[Karinna]

They are not 'far fetched' at all, not even 'a bit.' They are entirely practical, and not technical (the way my mind works) which is great. Tostee was not playing out some master plan here. He was clearly reacting to what he was presented with by what he described as a psycho and the recording backs that up. IMO he had every reason to come to that conclusion, given her erratic conduct. She unlawfully assaulted him in a manner which likely could have killed him. Instead of belting her physically, he acted with great restraint, removed her to the balcony for no reason other than to bring her violence to an effective end, and there the incident ought to have concluded. Irrationally, W chose a dumb option he cannot be held responsible for. Not guilty.

And how do any of us know that he wasn't the one being "psycho" as he accused WW of, and putting on a show and building up his alibi all the while with intent to kill her and have it all nicely taped for his cheap thrills?

 

[Ausgirl]

I think Tostee may have had moments where he wanted her to stay, then wanted her to go, then wanted her to stay. IMO he really started messing with her and he assumed it would make for good listening when he posted on the forum he frequented. Then the tone changed and I believe it then became more about asserting control. She challenged him and he didn't like it.

A very neat summary of my own sense of this.

 

[BigT]

BBM, In that case arent the jury being asked to speculate what was in WW's head at that point in time as to the reason what choice she felt she needed to take for what happened? And wouldn't that be speculation seeing as the jury don't know the answer to that?

Jury is not asked to speculate, they are asked to conclude Beyond a reasonable doubt. If you can conclude this beyond a reasonable doubt then perhaps you can convict of manslaughter....and this will be GT biggest concern.

 

[ninij9]

A knife used to cut cheese.

I love WSers. [emoji5]

Sorry to ask but what is a cheese knife?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Tortoise]

Loving your 'undername' Bo. What's it called, it's not an undername but I guess you'll know what I mean.

 

[Freya1977]

Exactly. I think she thought she was drinking vodka is what i thought i read somewhere? Poor girl, i wish she had of been with some friends that night. SM can be such a problem for young people IMO. I don't even really know anything about Tinder, but hook ups on some of those sites can be negative experiences. I'm not sure what kind of people need to use those sites? Can't young people just meet in real life anymore? It's just sad IMO.

I met my husband online. Lol.

 

[ninij9]

We have had some people here saying that chocking is OK UNLESS they throw decorative rocks at you. Then it is "abuse" ....

Or that throwing pebbles at someone constitutes reciprocating choking.

Btw, for the life of me it sounds like the majority of the pebbles hit his table or some other hard surface.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Bohemian]

Loving your 'undername' Bo. What's it called, it's not an undername but I guess you'll know what I mean.

Ta muchly. Um...hang on a tick. I'll check and repost.

 

[shultz]

Why didn't he just leave his apartment which i'm sure he was capable of doing and go get help from daddy if he was such a wuss?

Because we have a legal right to defend our homes.

 

[luceat lux vestra]

They are not 'far fetched' at all, not even 'a bit.' They are entirely practical, and not technical (the way my mind works) which is great. Tostee was not playing out some master plan here. He was clearly reacting to what he was presented with by what he described as a psycho and the recording backs that up. IMO he had every reason to come to that conclusion, given her erratic conduct. She unlawfully assaulted him in a manner which likely could have killed him. Instead of belting her physically, he acted with great restraint, removed her to the balcony for no reason other than to bring her violence to an effective end, and there the incident ought to have concluded. Irrationally, W chose a dumb option he cannot be held responsible for. Not guilty.

I don't think he was playing out a master plan either....

But I still think in the situation, he used unreasonable force, by locking her on a balcony. I don't care what the judge says - the balcony is another room (with no exit when the door is locked). He did an incredibly stupid thing.
W - a person with a BAC of 0.17 (and affected accordingly) was much smaller, physically. I get that he was pissed off, but I really doubt he was truly in fear of his life.

As an aside, what happens if you are on a jury and you disagree with something like the judge's definition of what constitutes the property? Because that could really affect the outcome. Using the judge's logic, the balcony is community property like the hallway area outside the individual apartment doors? That is just f___d.

 

[Bohemian]

Loving your 'undername' Bo. What's it called, it's not an undername but I guess you'll know what I mean.

'Custom User Title' in Settings > Edit Profile

 

[ninij9]

I think it because the prosecutor did not pursue the threats angle.

Lazy, if you ask me.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[shultz]

Why didn't he just leave his apartment which i'm sure he was capable of doing and go get help from daddy if he was such a wuss?

That has never been in dispute by me. Warriena was blind drunk, she was terrified, she was oxygen deprived, she had been roughed up, she was a long way from home.

She needed care .... not confinement ... the resident who invited her to his home's care .... using his duty of care.

Which is why it frustrates me when others on this thread keep expecting her to have acted as if she was sober and unafraid of the person inside.

.

So she's allowed to act completely irrationally but GT is expected to act in the most logical and thoughtful of ways?

 

[Cleaver Greene]

And how do any of us know that he wasn't the one being "psycho" as he accused WW of, and putting on a show and building up his alibi all the while with intent to kill her and have it all nicely taped for his cheap thrills?

We don't. You might be right.

 

[CleverKnot]

That witness did not know what had happened or was currently happening inside.

Please read the post that is directed at to.

The poster claimed she didn't know if anyone was awake. I replied that someone was calling to her as she went over the rail. Nothing more.