Gerard Baden Clay's murder appeal

Discussion in 'Allison Baden-Clay of Australia' started by marlywings, Feb 27, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JLZ

    JLZ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,316
    Likes Received:
    17,950
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In my opinion, it was reasonable for the jury to conclude that if Gerard didn't have the intention to kill during the fight, he surely formed the intention afterwards. He couldn't be certain Allison was unrevivable, but by putting her under the bridge he made it near enough to impossible for her to survive.
     


  2. Fuskier

    Fuskier Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,355
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Exactly. In the 'hypothetical scenario' that he punched her and she fell and hit her head, he did not ring a doctor/ambulance to get help for her. He was not a doctor. How was he sure she was dead? As JLZ states he put her in the car, drove to the bridge and unceremoniously dumped her there - lessening the chance that she would survive. IMHO he acted with what I call a 'consciousness of guilt' to conceal her death and conceal his part in her death.

    There were several 'hypothetical' scenarios floating around then:
    First of all, she hypothetically swallowed a packet of antidepressants and jumped off a bridge or fell down a hole. Then, hypothetically, she went for a walk and may have been abducted/murdered by a stranger or left home to go to a friends house. So much misleading. All that time he knew where she was and what had happened to her. He caused much distress to her loved ones, her friends, colleagues, neighbors and thousands of dollars in unnecessary search & rescue logistics expenditure. What about her phone? What did he do with that? At no stage did he admit to the police that he had been involved in her death.

    Again, domestic violence/no witnesses.

    This use of a hypothetical 'panic' angle in interpreting his 'hypothetical' actions after her death - I find disturbing.
    He had admitted nothing.

    My honest opinion only.
     
  3. Couldbe

    Couldbe Active Member

    Messages:
    573
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    43
    So true ..... my thoughts have been where would some hypothetical scenarios end when you put your mind them; but I guess the parameters of the Trial outcomes govern the possibilities.

    Just depends where they wish to put their legal emphasis and what they wish to use to support it? Sure baffles the majority of us.
    Meanwhile, regardless of the truth, the case is fitted into the cracks.
     
  4. Wolfinator

    Wolfinator New Member

    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just want to give a shout out to our LE agencies who did an amazing job under difficult circumstances.

    So hard to swallow. You catch the crook. Nurse the family through a harrowing time. Are lied to, fed red herrings etc etc. and then our courts do this.

    I am thankful every day for our police force who continue to turn up and do what would often feel like a thankless task.

    I understand the legal rigmarole - gratitude to our legal eagle sleuthers - but GBC is so vile that it's the sentiment of this down grade that bothers me .... "See girls - I didn't mean to hurt your mother.. " Maybe just a "little bit" Gerard....

    Gutted!!!


    IMO
     
  5. Fuskier

    Fuskier Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,355
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    83
    FYI

    http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/com...nt-in-appeal-for-freedom-20150826-gj8ksh.html

    How can he argue now - as part of his appeal - that he might have unintentionally killed his wife Allison, when he swore black and blue, at his trial only a year ago, that he did not?

    Just rewind a year... questions Baden-Clay was asked, under Oath, by his lawyer Michael Byrne 14 months ago:

    Did you kill your wife Allison?
    "No I did not," Baden-Clay said.

    "Did you fight with her on the evening of the 19th (of April 2012)?"
    "No I did not," he answered.

    I agree with Madonna King. This downgrade for Gerard Baden-Clay shows why we must reform our judicial system.
     
  6. Wolfinator

    Wolfinator New Member

    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sorry if this has already been posted but how about making a rule that man slaughter is not an option if you hide a body in panic after an accidental/unintentional death - it is considered murder regardless of intent!!!


    IMO
     
  7. JLZ

    JLZ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,316
    Likes Received:
    17,950
    Trophy Points:
    113
    With respect, no, I think it is worthwhile having a separate category of crime for intentional killing.

    Increasing the maximum possible sentence for manslaughter is another question; but presumably you'd want to reconsider murder sentencing at the same time.
     
  8. Fuskier

    Fuskier Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,355
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I have just witnessed today the legal use of 'rationalizations' and 'hypotheticals' to downgrade a conviction of murder.
     
  9. Wolfinator

    Wolfinator New Member

    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Cooler heads prevail. Thanks JLZ.


    IMO
     
  10. Froglady

    Froglady Member

    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    18
    This came on the tv
    while I was in a waiting room and I couldn't help but yell out BS. Needless to say everyone stared at me but I don't care. He is repulsive!
     
  11. Amee

    Amee Active Member

    Messages:
    6,197
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Acting Attorney-General Cameron Dick announces he may look into appealing the decision in Gerard Baden-Clay's new manslaughter conviction as the previously convicted murderer prepares to be re-sentenced in the new year.

    In Queensland the charge of manslaughter typically attracts a sentence of eight to 12 years.

    In a statement by Acting Attorney-General Cameron Dick he stated "I have requested legal advice today about the prospects of success on an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal involving Gerard Baden-Clay."
    "Once that advice has been received and considered, a decision will be made as to whether an appeal should be lodged. The Attorney-General must make a decision on any possible appeal within 28 days."


    https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3030301...ction-downgraded-from-murder-to-manslaughter/
     
  12. JCB

    JCB Active Member

    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    28
    There are no grounds for appeal which would have any prospect of success. It's not going to happen. I know politicians have to make statements when addressing matters that are in the public interest but it's just creating false hope unfortunately :(
     
  13. SapphireSteel

    SapphireSteel New Member

    Messages:
    6,786
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just popping in to ponder if Qld prisons are nice places...hope not...
     
  14. JLZ

    JLZ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,316
    Likes Received:
    17,950
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I disagree with the bolded, Trooper. The ground of appeal which succeeded was that the verdict was unreasonable. See paragraph 48,
    "the jury could not properly have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the element of intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm had been proved." http://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2015/QCA15-265.pdf (And I disagree with the judges, at least until I've thought about it some more.)
     
  15. they'll get you

    they'll get you CHRIS. P. BACON

    Messages:
    13,812
    Likes Received:
    48,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Could someone enlighten me please? How did Allison die?

    Did he hold a pillow over her face until she wasn't breathing or did he hit her and knock her out?

    Either way, Allison may have died when she was dropped over the bridge into the mud.
    Can't see past murder I'm sorry.

    I see this opening an avalanche of 'I didn't mean it' murderers.


    Forensic pathologists could not determine the cause of her death, but prosecutors suggested Baden-Clay smothered his wife to death while their daughters slept soundly in their beds.
    http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ng-wife-allison-badenclay-20140715-ztdon.html


    It could not be ruled out that there was a physical confrontation in which Allison fell and hit her head, the ruling by Chief Justice Catherine Holmes,
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-08/gerard-baden-clay-wins-appeal/7009464
     
  16. they'll get you

    they'll get you CHRIS. P. BACON

    Messages:
    13,812
    Likes Received:
    48,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How can we possibly say Rest in Peace Allison?
     
  17. JLZ

    JLZ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,316
    Likes Received:
    17,950
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The exact cause of death could not be established by the post-mortem pathologist.

    "The state of putrefaction and mummification was such as to obscure any injuries which had been sustained."

    "Dr Milne did not think Mrs Baden-Clay had died from natural causes, because there was no sign of any natural disease, but he could not establish the cause of death."

    paragraphs 9-11, http://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2015/QCA15-265.pdf
     
  18. Wolfinator

    Wolfinator New Member

    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So the interfering with corpse charge will still stand? Any chance the sentence for this and manslaughter will be served separately not concurrently?

    8-12 manslaughter
    2 years interference with corpse
    No parole


    IMO
     
  19. Trooper

    Trooper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,551
    Likes Received:
    21,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
    :naughty: just a darn minute, there, JLZ.... the jury's verdict was reasonable in the light of evidence presented, allied with the testimony of the accused. It wasn't the verdict the jury in all integrity gave that is unreasonable. . the judges of the appeal are saying that the interpretation of the facts they were called upon to cast a verdict were dicey.. ..

    Appeals judges cannot possibly rule on the thought processes and mindsets of any jury.. it just isn't done, because ,, the obvious response to this claim is, the jury found him guilty of murder. It was unanimous, which pre supposes that the jury , understanding the difference between murder and manslaughter, agreed that the element of intent was not only present, but was supported by corroborating evidence..

    the very verdict underlines the fact that the jury WERE indeed satisfied, properly satisfied beyond a shadow of doubt. Other wise it would have been a hung jury or a dismissed jury. It wasn't .

    but we could go round and round about this forever.. right now, its too horrid to even dwell on.
     
  20. Mumma Bear

    Mumma Bear New Member

    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And can we add perjury to that - maximum of 14 years. Served consecutively. Justice for his extra roll of the dice.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

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