The Crown v Gerard Baden-Clay, 10th July - Trial Day 18

Status
Not open for further replies.

sheldor

New Member
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
67
Reaction score
0
AFAIK, the DT and PT pick six each, I wonder which side picked more male jurors? I was discussing this with my eldest daughter the other night, she felt the male jurors may be more sympathetic to GBC, the female jurors not so much. I'm not sure if this is a case where gender plays a role, it definitely does in some trials. jmo

I wonder if it might be the other way around -- often male jurors will have little sympathy for someone they suspect has been violent to women or children. This is all speculative, obviously.
 

wakeskate

Just the facts, ma'am
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
286
Reaction score
0
I wonder how much of a coincidence it is that the first activity on both ABC and GBC's phones was within 1 minute of each other on that Friday 20th.

- 6:31am: ABC's phone connects to FTP tower
- 6:32am: GBC texts Allison for the first time

I personally think he remembered the phone that morning. He wouldn't have thought of it with all the activity the night before. Maybe he's gone out "driving the streets" and taken her phone with him. Switched it on, it's connected to FTP tower and then he's sent a text to it. Then the phone gets dumped. I don't know - just thinking.

This is very sus.
He may have turned on the phone. Sent a text, turned the sound off and thrown it in a ditch.

It could also be that when the first message was sent, the phone connected to the tower to retrieve the message.
Only the phone company would know what the message means.
 

Timmy

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
448
Reaction score
0
Yes I think the fact she scratched his face up shows he had the opportunity to stop. He kept going even as she fought him off.

I agree with you and Thinking on this.... Just can't see how it could be manslaughter.... If they accept that Allison has been smothered and they accept that Allison inflicted the scratches then I feel it has to be murder. MOO
 

Venus13

New Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
sure, looking up how to deliberate is hardly going to be seen as a major problem, the way I see it is that it goes on to point out that if juror(s) looked that up, just what else have they looked up on the internet in their spare time?

Why is Jury's allowed home? I'm sure years ago they were locked away slept in Hotel's etc until they come up with a verdict? Is this another way in cutting costs?
 

Bekazzled

New Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Yeah, I think the general feeling in Brisbane is that most of the jurors must think he's guilty (if not all) but a few are worried about the term "reasonable doubt". Anticipating a hung jury, I think the Judge (and prosecution probably at this point) are happy enough to have him charged for manslaughter because of the public outrage if he walks free. (Same thing happened in the death of Tina Watson, tried here in QLD). I think everyone's feeling pretty solid about a manslaughter charge, because those who feel iffy about a guilty verdict will fall easily into the lesser manslaughter category. I don't think anyone seriously expects any juror to believe GBC is completely innocent.

I think they're anticipating a manslaughter charge and some public uproar about it needing to be a guilty verdict afterwards. I believe he's guilty and if I was on the jury would have voted that way over manslaughter, but I think a lot of people feel (understandably) uncomfortable about the term "reasonable" when assessing the case. It's such a subjective, tricky word. I also think our government and police realize some stranger will probably attempt to kill him if he's set free. So they're offering a "lock him up for a while?" verdict rather than "lock him up for 20 years or whatever" option.

In my opinion only, all of this, including the next bit: Yes, I believe everyone in that courtroom knows GBC lied in his testimony and that he probably wasn't the one who moved the body that night. A heat-of-the-moment murder followed by a cover-up with a second person (GBC's father) seems to be most of the public's opinion here, with the added idea that GBC probably had the idea in his head for a while and on that night it erupted. (For all the reasons everyone knows so well. Wouldn't surprise me if Allison found out about everything and told him she was leaving him, taking the kids, etc.)
 

alioop

Verified Attorney (AU)
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
4
I'd advise all parents in the early stages of an unfolding family drama to keep their young children out of it for as long as possible. This would include sending them to school where they can just be kids and keep busy surrounded by friends - at least on that first day. Of course GBC made sure his girls were already worried because he had made them part of his cover story - but any normal parent would hopefully keep their worst fears to themselves for those first couple of hours, and not involve their young children until absolutely necessary. Depending on the situation, they could remain unaware of the problems altogether (i.e. if it is all sorted or resolved that day) and not experienced any stress at all. Or in a tragic situation like this one, they could at least have had one less day of anxiety and pain.

I think we live in a world where adults over-share with their children constantly. I've worked with kids who have been exposed to information and events that are just so far beyond their young minds' ability to process and deal with - it's very sad, and totally unnecessary.

I totally agree. I would bundle my kids to school so I could deal with a situation like this and protect them from it until I knew what was happening. I would also have played it down to my kids and not told them mummy is missing just that she's not home yet and is probably having a chat to someone. I also wouldn't have called the police that early.

Alioop, why would the prosecution and defence teams both not want the jury not to have a written copy of the judges directions?

It's in my opinion an antiquated system and needs big overhauling. Juries should get written directions including what reasonable doubt means. There should be no guess work for juries about how they should go about reaching a verdict.
If they can hear the judges summing up as many times as they ask for it, it's ridiculous they can't just be given a copy. They have already been told what is evidence and what isn't.
 

kiwijayne

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
771
Reaction score
739
This is very sus.
He may have turned on the phone. Sent a text, turned the sound off and thrown it in a ditch.

It could also be that when the first message was sent, the phone connected to the tower to retrieve the message.
Only the phone company would know what the message means.

I'm thinking that one of the senior BC's had it probably the Mother. She didn't go to the house that morning did she? Bet she turned it on or even Olivia did Fig Tree Pocket is less than 4kms from their house. Then one of them disposed of it and possibly the missing pajamas. IMHO
 

Zim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2012
Messages
318
Reaction score
273
I wonder how much of a coincidence it is that the first activity on both ABC and GBC's phones was within 1 minute of each other on that Friday 20th.

- 6:31am: ABC's phone connects to FTP tower
- 6:32am: GBC texts Allison for the first time

I personally think he remembered the phone that morning. He wouldn't have thought of it with all the activity the night before. Maybe he's gone out "driving the streets" and taken her phone with him. Switched it on, it's connected to FTP tower and then he's sent a text to it. Then the phone gets dumped. I don't know - just thinking.

Surely if HER phone was already destroyed at that point HIS messages would have been "unable to deliver"
Seems he knew about that. HER phone was turned on just long enough to receive texts then 'got rid of'
He knew exactly what he was doing at that time. It all fell apart following this ! IMOO
 

FigTree

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2013
Messages
3,477
Reaction score
327
Perhaps it was just that the carpet didn't look as though it had been freshly vacuumed? I'm sure we've seen pics of the back of the car and it does seem to contain a bit of debris/dust etc. I've thought that it would be more likely to have been given a quick flick or brush out, even by hand, to remove any obvious larger leaves, twigs, etc. And even if some of the leaf litter was found in there - it would be reasonable to assume that it could be there for an innocent reason and not out of place at all. Some of it could have even been from the bottoms of the toy baskets/boxes.

I agree he could have moved it by hand.
(because I believe it was pre-meditated and planned)
He would have worn gloves - again.
 

squizzey1

Verified insider - Allison Baden-Clay case
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
942
Reaction score
0
Why is Jury's allowed home? I'm sure years ago they were locked away slept in Hotel's etc until they come up with a verdict? Is this another way in cutting costs?

that's correct they were until verdict was given and if it was a long case they got exempted for life from further jury service
 

kiwijayne

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
771
Reaction score
739
I totally agree. I would bundle my kids to school so I could deal with a situation like this and protect them from it until I knew what was happening. I would also have played it down to my kids and not told them mummy is missing just that she's not home yet and is probably having a chat to someone. I also wouldn't have called the police that early.

Agrees. I would have told them that Mummy had left early to go to the conference and taken them to school. Then called the police.
 

Timmy

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
448
Reaction score
0
Agrees. I would have told them that Mummy had left early to go to the conference and taken them to school. Then called the police.

.... And most of us I assume would not have hurt mummy in the first place or put our children in that awful predicament !
 

Fuskier

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2010
Messages
4,355
Reaction score
252
Excellent and logical advice.

I just can't believe a juror did that, after all the warnings from the Judge. :facepalm:[/QUOT

It's a high profile public case. Maybe it shows level of anxiety in jurors. Needed swift, firm handling with clear guidelines from Judge which settles anxiety in most cases. Hopefully, Jury have now learned, through example, to come back to the judge with their queries. My opinion only.
 

alioop

Verified Attorney (AU)
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
4
Why is Jury's allowed home? I'm sure years ago they were locked away slept in Hotel's etc until they come up with a verdict? Is this another way in cutting costs?

Also it takes pressure off the jury to rush a verdict so they can get home to their families. Knowing they get to go home every day, it's a bit like just going to work for the day. Easier to handle.
 

PrimeSuspect

Born Free
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
10,412
Reaction score
18,186
Yeah, I think the general feeling in Brisbane is that most of the jurors must think he's guilty (if not all) but a few are worried about the term "reasonable doubt". Anticipating a hung jury, I think the Judge (and prosecution probably at this point) are happy enough to have him charged for manslaughter because of the public outrage if he walks free. (Same thing happened in the death of Tina Watson, tried here in QLD). I think everyone's feeling pretty solid about a manslaughter charge, because those who feel iffy about a guilty verdict will fall easily into the lesser manslaughter category. I don't think anyone seriously expects any juror to believe GBC is completely innocent.

I think they're anticipating a manslaughter charge and some public uproar about it needing to be a guilty verdict afterwards. I believe he's guilty and if I was on the jury would have voted that way over manslaughter, but I think a lot of people feel (understandably) uncomfortable about the term "reasonable" when assessing the case. It's such a subjective, tricky word. I also think our government and police realize some stranger will probably attempt to kill him if he's set free. So they're offering a "lock him up for a while?" verdict rather than "lock him up for 20 years or whatever" option.

In my opinion only, all of this, including the next bit: Yes, I believe everyone in that courtroom knows GBC lied in his testimony and that he probably wasn't the one who moved the body that night. A heat-of-the-moment murder followed by a cover-up with a second person (GBC's father) seems to be most of the public's opinion here, with the added idea that GBC probably had the idea in his head for a while and on that night it erupted. (For all the reasons everyone knows so well. Wouldn't surprise me if Allison found out about everything and told him she was leaving him, taking the kids, etc.)

Do you honestly believe that? I always thought someone would kill the pedophile Ferguson, but nobody ever did, I just can't see that happening with GBC. jmho
 

Bekazzled

New Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
QLD and I believe general Australian courts don't do the jury duty thing where people are holed up in hotels. No one I have ever known who has been a juror has done this here, and several people I know have been jurors on murder trials. The system follows more of a "we trust you'll keep this info to yourself, or you're out" mentality and allow people to go home at night. They're not supposed to discuss the case with anyone and in this case, not allowed to access social media. And from what I can gather, the jurors have been very good about keeping their lips shut in this regard. It just seems to be a law that's taken seriously and everyone respects it? e.g. Some people in Brisbane have figured out individual members of the jury because they have shown up for work around only certain times of the trial (mornings, Fridays etc) and have "gone on leave", and these individuals have been very quiet and others leave them alone. I think it's so nail-bitingly serious and awful that people treat it very timidly and respectfully... well, so far. MOO
 

Amee

Active Member
Joined
May 9, 2012
Messages
6,197
Reaction score
4
Michael Kersnovske ‏@MKersnovske 32s

Additional chairs being brought into the court ahead of #badenclay verdict. Jury still deliberating @tennewsqld
 

BJsleuth

New Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2012
Messages
1,530
Reaction score
0
On the topic of "no leaves in the car" - I have struggled with the evidence led that there was "no sign of a cleanup" in the car. How do they know it wasn't vacuumed out? Sure there was no clear sign of blood found on the vacuum brush etc, but what about the leaves, mud etc? Perhaps by "no sign of a cleanup" they meant no bleach, attempt to hide/clean away blood etc.

I thought about this too. Presumably no clean up because the blood was still there and leaf litter still in the foot well etc. I mentioned way back that the car could have been vacuumed then staged to look like it wasn't. Someone mentioned lines from the vacuum on the carpet. I think there are ways around it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top