The Crown v Gerard Baden-Clay, 19th June - Trial Day 7, Week 2

[Humdinger]

Ok, so I have been poking around social media to 'gauge' the feeling re the evidence presented thus far. I have to say many people are saying they wouldn't convict unless they hear some 'hard' evidence and so far everything can be explained. Sadly I think people are looking for 100% proof which doesn't actually happen - and I am hoping that the jury has enough reason to look at ALL the circumstantial evidence to see how damning it is and not want proof positive for a guilty verdict.



Consider, if he gets off:



He get full custody of the girls

He gets all the money

He will probably sell his story to the media for $$$$$$$$$

He will probably ensure the Dickies never see the girls again

He may sue to get the rights to the girls' donation funds



What do you think?

I think that a lot of people making comments on social media don't know as much as the jury does! They probably don't have a great understanding of how the system actually works either. I mean, most of us can cast our minds back a few years and that was us I think it's fair to say that us WS'ers have an above average understanding of our judicial system.

The jury are listening to days and days of evidence, taking notes, reading transcripts at night, taking in the demeanour of the accused when certain evidence is shown and spoken of, watching the witnesses and forming opinions of their credibility, so on and so forth!

I can't really see (or can't allow myself to see) him getting off. I'm just not sure if it's my gut or my head telling me that though.

Hugs to everyone, it's going to get very emotional and stressful in the coming weeks!

 

[Cattail]

If I was a juror I would be very interested in the plant matter in her hair that came from their property. The poor woman had just had her hair done. No way she would have left this stuff in her hair if it had got their by accident (say by brushing against a shrub or tripping).
To me this means she was not in a position to remove it. But her body was found at Kholo Creek. How did she get there. 14kms is a long distance to walk. Along with those fingernail scratches I think I would be inclined toward guilty. Here's hoping anyway.

I hope at least some of it is from low growing plants so it can't be suggested that she brushed past a plant and collected it. I know I often end up with grevillea in my hair from the one near our letterbox.

 

[LadyBird1]

Does anyone else think it was a huge risk for one or two people to drive Allison away from the home for such a long time and thereby leaving one or more of the girls able to wake up, become distressed at mum and dad not home when the child is entirely capable of calling 000 or grandparents herself?

Do you really think that G cared whether his children were home alone or not?
You do raise a very valid point: The child might be entirely capable of calling 000 or somebody, herself. Unless the child was more frightened of her father and the consequences of such an action.

 

[they'll get you]

Tgy, you just jogged my memory and I don't think this was reported - on the day I saw TM on the stand she was talking about her final meeting with GBC (in the Valley) before his arrest. She cried as she talked about that meeting as she was confronting him about the other women. She also said tearily that GBC told her she had to fall in love with someone else as things weren't looking good for him, and she also said (sorry I'm getting to the interesting part now ) that she knew she had to, because no matter what happened with GBC from that time on, she could never be with him permanently as his children would never accept her, given the circumstances. Very true and perhaps good to know she has the insight to acknowledge this.

Thinking, if he got an out of gaol card and was awarded Allison's insurance, the proceeds of the sale of Allison's house etc (I'm actually shuddering) TMcH didn't think of anyone but herself before so I actually imagine she'll be drawn to him more. I really doubt the girls will matter.

 

[they'll get you]

Another interesting tidbit re the "view" on Monday, is that GBC had to make a request/application to court, to NOT attend. The judge accepted the request. Does this mean that the defendant would usually attend the viewing - do you know Ali? Would be so interesting as a juror to spend the whole time just watching him, if that were the case. No wonder he wouldn't want to attend (guilty or innocent admittedly).

WTH!!?? That's so wrong!!! A murderer could convince the jury he's an all round nice guy and totally sway the outcome.
What him and the jury have a nice little picnic under the bridge just metres away from Allison's memorial??

I don't think so!!!

He should not be seeing the sun shining, green grass & birds twittering let alone a excursion unless he's being moved to high security.

 

[possumheart]

Do you really think that G cared whether his children were home alone or not?
You do raise a very valid point: The child might be entirely capable of calling 000 or somebody, herself. Unless the child was more frightened of her father and the consequences of such an action.

The oldest child had a mobile phone which is listed in one of the posted documents (with other seized phones, computer equipment etc) - how I wish she had rung kids help line.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Is this helpful?

www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/.../sd-bb-46-circumstantial-evidence.pdf

Sorry but link doesn't work.

 

[squizzey1]

WTH!!?? That's so wrong!!! A murderer could convince the jury he's an all round nice guy and totally sway the outcome.
What him and the jury have a nice little picnic under the bridge just metres away from Allison's memorial??

I don't think so!!!

A convicted murder should not be seeing the sun shining, green grass & birds twittering let alone a excursion unless he's being moved to high security.

I partly agree but why should he make the rules . I just reckon if he went there he may just crack and give the jury some incriminating material JMO

 

[Oddsocks]

Wow that Lloyd Rayney case has some striking similarities to this case!

http://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/_files/Judgment_Summary_Rayney.pdf

That was a very interesting read. Thanks for that

 

[squizzey1]

WTH!!?? That's so wrong!!! A murderer could convince the jury he's an all round nice guy and totally sway the outcome.
What him and the jury have a nice little picnic under the bridge just metres away from Allison's memorial??

I don't think so!!!

A convicted murder should not be seeing the sun shining, green grass & birds twittering let alone a excursion unless he's being moved to high security.

with all due respect he is not yet CONVICTED

 

[Neuromancer]

I hope at least some of it is from low growing plants so it can't be suggested that she brushed past a plant and collected it. I know I often end up with grevillea in my hair from the one near our letterbox.

Yes - ferns. There were 10 pinnae (leaf-like thingies) from those fishbone ferns that are an invasive weed in so many Qld gardens.

The rest were waist-high or higher (crepe myrtle, lilly pilly, chinese elm) and a creeper that could be any height.

All these grew at the rear patio (and elsewhere), except the Lilly pilly which was at side of carport (and it's a tall variety of LP which makes me think a leaf from there blew over).

So my impression is either a rumble/fall into the bushes or onto the ground (during fight) or being dragged along ground later.

While either are possible, I'd lean slightly more towards it being more likely that she was carried to the car fireman-style (65 kg isn't that heavy for a 6' guy, esp with adrenaline running thru your system) than being dragged along the ground at the risk of leaving drag marks (even on a tarp)

I wonder if there was any damage to bushes seen (we only have 1 page of the plant report which was 30+ pages), and also wonder if there could have been blood spilled in the plant area that would have been missed as it just soaked into ground.

Plant report: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=30817&d=1363404789

 

[Oddsocks]

Regarding blood on ground, were sniffer dogs used in the investigation?

 

[possumheart]

with all due respect he is not yet CONVICTED

And I think that is an important point. The last thing we want is crucifixion by social media to be the thing that casts doubt in the juror's minds. I know I have been pulling back from this forum whenever it starts to sound like a lynch mob.
Such a shame.

 

[they'll get you]

so no one thinks rolph harris is innocent

squizzey I haven't been following but I believe it's been happening between fans and stars long before Charlie Chaplin.

Pricilla Presley was only 14 or 15. Did her parents know?? Why was that acceptable with the media and society?
I'll go have a peek.

 

[frustrated detective]

If GBC escapes conviction (which I doubt) he would almost certainly have to go through a Family Court process for custody of the girls.

I doubt that the Dickies would give them up without a fight. The girl's wishes would also be considered, and their need to stay together. Also the routine and stability which has been established over the past two years.

It wouldn't just be straight out of jail and business as usual.

 

[Minerva]

To date the suicide theory has been blown right away, though some are still trying very hard to revive it.
To date it has been proven that Allison was not suicidal. More than that, she was RESILIENT (Very good word)
It has also been proved that Allison was a HAPPY person. Any depression that she suffered (and it is acknowledged that was had a degree of depression at some times) was not the type of depression that would cause her to suicide. She was not Moribund. She did not suffer Clinical Depression.

To date it has been proven, (well almost proven,) that the marks on his face were caused by fingernails. Not the result of a blunt razor.
IMO That is a pretty big thing to get around, as it also proves that the razor story is a lie.

IMO quite a fair bit has been established thus far.

I feel almost obligated to try and envision a scenario where GBC is in fact not guilty. I keep having "Azaria Chamberlain" moments.

Okay, so I don't buy that the facial marks were from a razor. I also don't buy that Allison was suicidal.

Maybe they did have a humdinger of a row that night and she scratched his face. That's why they didn't go to bed together. Allison was perhaps gung-ho on her new weight loss routine and did go out walking anyway, being highly motivated. GBC instinctively knows that something is not right when he gets up, prompting phone calls to the family. GBC wants to call the police, the family worry that the police will take one look at his scratches and think he's done something to his wife and they together cook up a *advertiser censored* and bull story about GBC cutting himself shaving. OBW's strange behaviour fits in here, she isn't taking the situation terribly seriously yet. The police don't believe him, a bad situation becomes a nightmare.

I am not convinced he really was going to leave Allison for Toni. He was unhappy in his marriage, Allison was not meeting his needs, nor was he meeting hers. But he still hadn't left. Because of his daughters? Because he was genuinely worried about the effect on Allison as well? Because he couldn't in good conscience leave when there was no money? I'm sure he was just counting on getting some good commissions in to help refloat the financial boat.

That's about the best I can do so far. I haven't yet figured out how to explain the plant matter. Or the blood. Or the motivation of a random perpetrator in snatching Allison off the side of the road, but the size of the investigation would have scared him out of the area and put him off further attacks.

I am here picking over the details of their lives and I feel guilty for finding this whole story so compelling. And I guess I would love there to be some twist in the tale whereby a wife wasn't actually murdered by her husband, three little girls won't spend the rest of their lives knowing that their father murdered their mother, that two parents won't have a murderer for a son and another two parents won't have to live with the knowledge that their daughter was murdered by her husband and worry endlessly about their granddaughters till the end of their days.

Sorry. Just another (probably worthless) :twocents:

 

[squizzey1]

That was a very interesting read. Thanks for that

wasn't that a judge only trial

 

[marlywings]

A reminder to everyone...

Rumours are not allowed on WS. If you state something as fact you need to supply a media or police report link to support it otherwise your post will be removed.

 

[they'll get you]

with all due respect he is not yet CONVICTED

My apologies my words were incorrect.

 

[Humdinger]

wasn't that a judge only trial

Yes it was and with him being a lawyer he had the smarts to do it and get away with it - though I know he wasn't convicted - just saying IF he did it. Which IMO he did. GBC just doesn't have the same smarts as LR!