NO BAIL! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#27

[CaseClosed]

I posted this a while back - not sure if anyone listened to the report - I'm still not sure what the reporter means, but may shed light on what the girls were saying.

http://ten.com.au/ten-news-brisbane.htm - the one titled Gerard Baden-Clay


Just watched this footage. I'm confused by something the reporter says at 2:30. Something about the children not been allowed to speak to anyone until a debrief. The way she words it, I'm unsure if she means the police were telling people this, or the children were telling people this. It really does sound like she means the children were saying this.

If the children were telling people this, maybe this was the 'strange' thing that the children said when the police arrived the morning Allison was reported missing?

I interpreted it as being a legal thing now (not when they were at the home). The children not allowed to speak, until the proper procedure is followed, etc.

 

[Agent_99]

It is weird to think of the prisoners he is now in with - they would have seen on the news and in the papers this whole sorry story unfolding. Strange for them to now have him in there amongst them - they have no doubt been expecting the pleasure of his company for a while.

Yes and he could talk to the Tahitian Prince about his money worries!

 

[marlywings]

What a funny old day. I felt a bit useless not being able to go to the cricket, and also feel at a bit of a loose end after many weeks of trying to go over little detail in other posts and in my head.
I can see where you are coming from Makara, but also agree with Marlywings. At the end of the day it would be great to have 20/20 foresight and hindsight and am sure I have done my share of coming up with theories just to try and make sense of it all. Despite this, I feel quite privileged to have shared this journey with all of the posters (including the ones that got on my nerve from time to time). It is a bit like life, ups and downs, and I am sure that if there is anything we can all agree on is that we are so much better off than Allison.

As Leonard Cohen sang so beautifully 'there is a crack, a crack in everything .... That's how the light gets in'!!

My apologies to anyone that feels I did not take them seriously, who may have felt misunderstood, or whose posts I argued with. The collectivity of this forum has the final say on wisdom not one individual.

All IMOO MOO

mmmmm... Leonard Cohen also sings - Hallelujah to your post...lol..

Loveeee that song!!!

 

[pulpfiction]

I remember his posts about something being found in one of the cars & also something about the girls having told police whatever...nothing had been reported on either of those back then so how could they be classed as fact?? I still don't know whether or not the girls said anything to police...hasn't been any mention of that in any reports.

But we had no way of knowing whether that was all true or not...there's been soooo many rumours...some of which may turn out to be fact, some may turn out to be just rumours.

Hmm. How do I put this? Ok I'll try this and try to be hypothetical. If a person is reported as "missing" then police will ask all the occupants of a house if they were told by the alleged missing person if they happened to be told where the person might be going. Children included. For example, GBC claims to have been asleep 10pm-6am. He states he awoke and finds ABC missing. When police arrive In a situation like this one of the first things they do when mounting a search is ask "did he/she tell you where she was going" or "did you see him/her leave" or "do you know where he/she is", "did someone come to get her/him in a car" etc. etc. Just because GBC says he was asleep till 6am doesn't mean other occupants were asleep until then. Children often wake before 6am and its entirely reasonable that all occupants would be asked if they knew anything at all because at that point it was thought to be she was missing - ie. had gone for a walk, left home early, could have been abducted etc. etc. QPS have many officers trained to "interview children with care". Their approach would have been general at first. GBC obviously knew things were dire at that point but it's POSSIBLE the children did not for a variety of reasons we won't know for some time. In a nutshell the children needed to be questioned in case they had vital information or even if they were told something as simple as "I'll be back soon, I'm going for milk"

As I always say IMO ...

 

[KSM]

I was thinking that maybe he had sent out friends requests over the last few months or longer, and many people hadn't confirmed it. But since his spectacular fall from grace, they are clicking confirm...its kind of like a car crash, you want to look away but you just cant...I think if he had added me a while ago, and then all this happened, I might confirm friendship, just to be a sticky beak

Just on the FB topic. GBC had around 385 friends when Allison first went missing. I only know this because I was (note past tense) a FB friend of his and sent him a message when it was first announced in the media that Allison was missing, saying I hope she was found safe and well. In the weeks after Allison was found, his FB friends' numbers didn't go down significantly - I think they went down to around 375. When he was arrested, it went back up to the original numbers. However, on the same day, my FB friends increased by around 15 people so I agree with the previous poster who mentioned a possible FB glitch.

Also, he had a lot of messages of support on his wall - from family and friends - and (IMO) possibly a lot of private messages through FB too.
His wall was closed for comments (I think) around the time he was arrested, and the final posts on his wall are from the day before Allison's funeral.
On FB, you can include your favourite quote. GBC's was "If it's meant to be, it's up to me" and his favourite show was listed as "Revenge". Hmmm...all MOO

 

[Strangeworld]

I interpreted it as being a legal thing now (not when they were at the home). The children not allowed to speak, until the proper procedure is followed, etc.

Just seems strange language for children to use. Who told them to tell 'people' this? And which 'people' were they telling this to, and at what time? I still think it suggests they were saying this quite early in the investigation, possibly on the morning she was reported missing.

 

[Rational]

mmmmm... Leonard Cohen also sings - Hallelujah to your post...lol..

Loveeee that song!!!

Me too sadly a Leonard Cohen tragic (much to the chagrin of others in the house!!) sorry OT

 

[marlywings]

Hmm. How do I put this? Ok I'll try this and try to be hypothetical. If a person is reported as "missing" then police will ask all the occupants of a house if they were told by the alleged missing person if they happened to be told where the person might be going. Children included. For example, GBC claims to have been asleep 10pm-6am. He states he awoke and finds ABC missing. When police arrive In a situation like this one of the first things they do when mounting a search is ask "did he/she tell you where she was going" or "did you see him/her leave" or "do you know where he/she is", "did someone come to get her/him in a car" etc. etc. Just because GBC says he was asleep till 6am doesn't mean other occupants were asleep until then. Children often wake before 6am and its entirely reasonable that all occupants would be asked if they knew anything at all because at that point it was thought to be she was missing - ie. had gone for a walk, left home early, could have been abducted etc. etc. QPS have many officers trained to "interview children with care". Their approach would have been general at first. GBC obviously knew things were dire at that point but it's POSSIBLE the children did not for a variety of reasons we won't know for some time. In a nutshell the children needed to be questioned in case they had vital information or even if they were told something as simple as "I'll be back soon, I'm going for milk"

As I always say IMO ...

Oh I completely understand all of that but we were discussing another member's posts from way back in first thread.....at that time we had no idea whether the girls were even in the house that night/morning....that debate has raged on & on until only the other day when it was confirmed they were there.

As Rational has said...hindsight is a wonderful thing. The rumours bag was overflowing...the fact bag was almost empty at the time.

I'll also add...Inspector Ainsworth's bag will have all the answers & all the facts....

I just wish he'd play sharing some more...lol.

 

[Limaes]

So how many times now have the cops been to Nigelaine's? Awful lot of smoke coming from there imo.

 

[CaseClosed]

Hmm. How do I put this? Ok I'll try this and try to be hypothetical. If a person is reported as "missing" then police will ask all the occupants of a house if they were told by the alleged missing person if they happened to be told where the person might be going. Children included. For example, GBC claims to have been asleep 10pm-6am. He states he awoke and finds ABC missing. When police arrive In a situation like this one of the first things they do when mounting a search is ask "did he/she tell you where she was going" or "did you see him/her leave" or "do you know where he/she is", "did someone come to get her/him in a car" etc. etc. Just because GBC says he was asleep till 6am doesn't mean other occupants were asleep until then. Children often wake before 6am and its entirely reasonable that all occupants would be asked if they knew anything at all because at that point it was thought to be she was missing - ie. had gone for a walk, left home early, could have been abducted etc. etc. QPS have many officers trained to "interview children with care". Their approach would have been general at first. GBC obviously knew things were dire at that point but it's POSSIBLE the children did not for a variety of reasons we won't know for some time. In a nutshell the children needed to be questioned in case they had vital information or even if they were told something as simple as "I'll be back soon, I'm going for milk"

As I always say IMO ...

Without wanting to get into an argument with you, there was a member who said he/she was a JP and had been used in many instances to be a "neutral and impartial" witness to QPS/Child Safety interviews with children. I agree that all adults would be asked questions at the scene, but I don't agree with the children being able to be questioned, even if it was in a casual and caring way. There is a stringent process to be followed. The rumour referred to earlier was related to GBC having said to QPS that the kids were at home that night and one of the girls interjecting and saying "no, we were not" ... but as we now now, that is incorrect, because the girls were at home that night. All IMO.

 

[CaseClosed]

Just seems strange language for children to use. Who told them to tell 'people' this? And which 'people' were they telling this to, and at what time? I still think it suggests they were saying this quite early in the investigation, possibly on the morning she was reported missing.

No, sorry, I don't think the kids used that language ... I think it's someone else who informed the media that.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

I now believe the visit to GBC's parent's home that night was partly in relation to the mobile phone analysis and discovery of the face time call, as it was reported in MSM that the result came through not long before his bail hearing.

Hmmm...I'm not so sure about that as I would have thought when police did the raid on NBC's house they would have taken their phones along with all the rest of the items they took on that day....unless the BC's had other phones hidden away somewhere.

Last Thursday night there were five detectives sent to the house & I think they spent around an hour at the house....still can't work out why they needed five detectives!!.

I don't think it was coincidence that 5 detectives show up to the BC seniors the same day the police got the information back regarding the midnight facecall to NBC by GBC. Maybe there was information in the phone- call records etc, that led them to go and search BC seniors. It doesn't mean its their phones they were looking for..maybe their phones were taken previously(but again police only got the info back on GBC phone the day the detectives show up to BC seniors, so info from their phone may also have just come back if thats the case). However if police weren't really linking them in at the time, they may have had no reason to take their phones. But again nothing to say it was phones they were looking for..(maybe it was Allisons phone? just a thought, as unsure if they have found that yet). MOO

 

[Monty]

Even though he shows similar traits to deviant behaviour and/or personality, there are only a select few professionals who would have had the opportunity (and qualifications) to assess and diagnose him, if he does in fact meet DSM-IV criteria. I think it is a dangerous game to be labelling him as definitely having one disorder or another, based on rumour, MSM and detached observations on tv or in the street.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder"]Antisocial personality disorder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
IMO, and without wanting to offend you strange world, I believe that Based on the CP case against GBC, based upon his behaviors and chosen interviews, one can suppose the above mentioned link may pertain to cartain personality traits of an alleged murderer. I also believe the persons whose professions enable them to label an individual through various testing mechanisms are often prone to getting it wrong.
I think labeling or as I see it judging someone is an integral part of being human. Based on the information brought before us, coupled with intuition, IMHO, it a fair assumption to consider these traits sociopathic

 

[marlywings]

I don't think it was coincidence that 5 detectives show up to the BC seniors the same day the police got the information back regarding the midnight facecall to NBC by GBC. Maybe there was information in the phone- call records etc, that led them to go and search BC seniors. It doesn't mean its their phones they were looking for..maybe their phones were taken previously(but again police only got the info back on GBC phone the day the detectives show up to BC seniors, so info from their phone may also have just come back if thats the case). However if police weren't really linking them in at the time, they may have had no reason to take their phones. But again nothing to say it was phones they were looking for..(maybe it was Allisons phone? just a thought, as unsure if they have found that yet). MOO

I somehow think they were linking them in from wayy back...all the items taken from that house on the day police went in back around 26th April...their shed also searched I think it was reported.

Yes I agree, it may not have been any phone they were looking for...wish they'd tell us...lol.

 

[Monty]

I can't shake the thought of the amount of pain ABC was feeling prior to her death. The emotional, gut wrenching pain of betrayal, and then, if she was murdered at home, with her children there, the fear of knowing she was being killed, (I hope she was able to fight hard for her life) and the fear for her children and what would become of them. such pain, panic, fear, ........oh dear Allison I do hope justice prevails for you and those who love you xx

 

[Monty]

I somehow think they were linking them in from wayy back...all the items taken from that house on the day police went in back around 26th April...their shed also searched I think it was reported.

Yes I agree, it may not have been any phone they were looking for...wish they'd tell us...lol.

Agreed as well

 

[Bobbie Elliott]

Great question. They crumble because their power ( or rather perceived power) is taken. They become vulnerable. They become the target or victim in prison quite often. That said many, when they adjust, become very dangerous prisoners as they lack empathy and will often attempt to build a power base in prison and target the weak in there also. the variables and environment just changes.

If you google you'll find lots of stuff on this that reliable and valid. Journal articles. GBC is an unknown entity. Stress is a big factor. Hence my term house of cards. Hope this helps

Please bear with my hypothesising (IMO) - My gut feeling from what we know about GBC is that he is not a "man's man". His involvement with men (apart from his father) seems to have been primarily business related. There don't appear to have been any mates around to support him - even before it was dogs balls what he had done. Even his own staff were all or nearly all female.

His need to crack on to lots of women (even in the presence of their husbands), would not have endeared him to the men in his community. I don't think that this was necessarily because the men felt threatened by his sexual magnetism, high profile etc etc. It's just plain socially inappropriate and the behaviour of a total *advertiser censored*.

Because male prison is a "man's world", GBC might not have the skills to schmooze in such an environment. He might also pi$$ off a lot of his new peers.

 

[Thinking]

Stating the obvious - but it is so awful to think about the children being home that night. If the disturbance was so loud that the neighbours could hear it (and these are not average suburban blocks), then the children would definitely have heard stuff. Then mummy suddenly disappears.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

I somehow think they were linking them in from wayy back...all the items taken from that house on the day police went in back around 26th April...their shed also searched I think it was reported.

Yes I agree, it may not have been any phone they were looking for...wish they'd tell us...lol.

Fair point.. I keep having it in my mind it was only GBC computer and 'stuff' that was taken from their place.(and as it was only a few days after Allisons dissapearance, thought they may not have had reason to implicate them at that point- but I don't know that)

I still think something to do with the phone information coming back sent the detectives back out to BC seniors, what for though..who knows. Yes it would be good to know..lol

 

[CJ60]

Yeah but they weren't rumours, they were fact. Sometimes people just need to read between the lines and give a person a break. IMO.

Maverick.au's posts read like QPS Media releases - I never felt like it was a personal opinion being posted - it was more like reading actual 'facts'.
Same goes for Keyboredom.

I would never have questioned anything these posters wrote - my gut instinct told me they were 'on the money'.

And I took great comfort from Mavericks post in Thread 1 - he/she said the QPS knew who killed Allison. That gave me confidence there would be an arrest, and that I was correct in my opinion of who killed Allison.

In memory of OJ and JK673