D
Deleted member 102539
Guest
Well wont that be a sob story and a half....I bet he will claim he was depressed...
... and he had planned to take his own life two times with a little car crash ...?
Well wont that be a sob story and a half....I bet he will claim he was depressed...
Fair enough that was before she went missing. What about 10 minutes before he called the QPS he once again looked up the term "self incrimination"?
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...l-prosecution-closes-case-20140625-zslnz.html
Gerard at his finest... burbling, chirping, detail upon detail, little giggles.. just a nice all round happy but puzzled bloke, chatting in a blokey way with the QPS, defect, deflect , deflect..
Alioop, if GBC gets convicted, will victim impact statements have any influence on the length of sentence he receives? I'm sure there are plenty of heartbreaking ones that could be submitted.
ali , ali , what would be the sentence for unlawful killing , and interfering with a corpse , could it be up to 15 years if they were accumulated and not concurrent PLEASE
max sica was found guilty on far less than what they have on GBC. I am not worried. it will be more of a matter what he is convicted of....
Sent using Tapatalk
Maybe the defence will not call ANY witnesses. After all, who have they got? They have cross examined all the prosecution witnesses they wanted to.
Is the defence bluffing here?? Like they did in committal!? No case to answer - just giving it a go? OR are they that confident that they think they've proven their case? I realise the judge has rejected that but it's not up to him is it? Just trying to understand the strategy here? Anyone want to weigh in?
What's the demeanor of both sides? God what I'd give to be a fly on the wall!
I have no idea what to think.
But do the jury hear or will the prosecution be able to use it in their summary? They have mentioned that it has been agreed that Gerard made a claim on May 1st but will this be emphasised to the jury that this was before identification. It also said it was agreed between teams that the finances were in dire straits, so hopefully jury are told this
I'm not quite sure how you arrived at that conclusion but nevertheless you are entitled to your opinion. I don't want to clog up any more of this thread but for the record I was quoting a very rare exception, one that definitely does not apply to this trial. One thing I think we can all agree on is that if GBC is indeed responsible for Allison's murder, he is swiftly and justly dealt with for the sake of Allison, her family and her friends.
I was disappointed the botanist didn't go any further this morning.
Yesterday we heard plant matter was found in Captiva.
So I guess it was from the house & discounted :dunno:
10:24am: In their conversation Sergeant Matthews asked Mr Baden-Clay about the last time he saw his wife.
Mr Baden-Clay repeated what he had told officers previously, saying he went to bed about 10pm and left his wife on the couch watching The Footy Show. He said he woke to find his wife missing, but noted that was not unusual, because Mrs Baden-Clay often went for early morning walks.
"I got up and started doing my reasonable routine, you know, shower and shave," Mr Baden-Clay said.
"And I checked my emails on the toilet, ummm ....
"And then I was a bit surprised that [our middle daughter] wasn't up, because our middle daughter is always up with the sparrows and I went through and she was awake in her room, but not up ...
"Then I started shaving ... and I was running through to Sarah ... and I cut myself which is what everyone is so concerned about. Then I asked [our middle daughter] to help me put a bandaid on it."
Mr Baden-Clay told the officer he started to become worried about his wife's location about 6.30pm.
"I put her hot rollers on for her, because it takes her a good 25 minutes to get ready ... and then I texted her, " he said.
"Actually, Sarah wasn't even awake at that point. Sorry ... Sarah wasn't even awake at that point. Then I was rushing because I knew I had to get them all up for school."
Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...y-10-week-3-20140625-3aqx5.html#ixzz35bedQou9
I'm not quite sure how you arrived at that conclusion but nevertheless you are entitled to your opinion. I don't want to clog up any more of this thread but for the record I was quoting a very rare exception, one that definitely does not apply to this trial. One thing I think we can all agree on is that if GBC is indeed responsible for Allison's murder, he is swiftly and justly dealt with for the sake of Allison, her family and her friends.
Speaking of TM ..... did anyone at the Trial today notice that in the spreadsheet detailing the phone calls that the Detectives had collated and showed calls made from various phones ..... there was a call from one mobile phone in TM's name to second phone in TM's name .. call lasting barely one second time (this occurred around 5.20pm on 19 Apr during a bunch of phone calls between GBC and TM .... when one or two of the calls between the two of them seemed to drop out). In wondering why TM would phone another phone in her name, it could be deduced that the other phone was in the name of one her boys / or did GBC possess a mobile phone? (registered in the name of TM!).
One would think that TM would not, during such a serious and anxious discussion going on between GBC and TM, that she would take time out to make an attempt to phone one of her boys.
NO, JMO .... it is most likely to be that TM would have that second phone in her name for the use of GBC.
There may be other phone call records between these two phones in the possession of the Detectives.
Most likely, more incriminating evidence to come ....... when Defence intervened this afternoon, and took the opportunity to change the charge from MURDER. JMO
I was hoping for a little more linking Gerard to her murder.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
This is something I've definitely struggled with in looking at this case. Just been having a look tonight on Google and based on the suggested direction from the Qld Courts website that is to be given if the jurors are struggling with the concept, it seems like there is no specific guidance on what constitutes "reasonable doubt".
"A reasonable doubt is such a doubt as you, the jury, consider to be
reasonable on a consideration of the evidence. It is therefore for you, and
each of you, to say whether you have a doubt you consider reasonable. If
at the end of your deliberations, you, as reasonable persons, have such a
doubt about the guilt of the defendant, the charge has not been proved
beyond reasonable doubt."
http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/86060/sd-bb-57-reasonable-doubt.pdf
It gives me a little more confidence that the jury will not be swayed by the defence blatant attempts to pick holes in the prosecution case (such as questioning whether the expert witnesses could 100% rule out an alternative cause for scratches. I mean of course they can't if they weren't there but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...)
Oh Praise The Lord! Alioop has arrived!
Alioop is at the building!
you are welcome.
I had re-read that msm the other day, because when I first read it I thought it meant the hair tested to Allisons DNA. But it was the blood .
The court heard police conducted a chemical test for blood which returned a positive result. A hair was also found at the base of the stain.
The court also heard that Allison's DNA was found in the boot of the couple's car. The sample came from a blood stain in the boot of the car
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...den-Clays-diary-read-court.html#ixzz35djFrVc6
Pls bear with me as I'm reading back from what I missed and not sure if this is already been mentioned. Section BBM. So middle daughter allegedly saw GBC BEFORE the shaving accident. Anyone care to check the statement if this matches?!? Or is Sarah the middle child?
Yes, the blood DNA match was known at the time of the bail application - hair results were still pending at that time. The link http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...his-wife-allison/story-fnihsrf2-1226948779375
that Amee dug up for me (thanks again!!) states this (attributed to Todd Fuller in his opening address):
"He said a hair attached to the blood stain was later confirmed with DNA as belonging to Ms Baden-Clay."
It could easily be a mistake - confused with the blood result, as today in court apparently there was testimony from Amanda Reeves (forensics) that the hair was too difficult to get DNA from.
... and he had planned to take his own life two times with a little car crash ...?
Hi Fluffykins I believe G has said he looked it up for his mother for The Good Wife.....
No, not take his own life, just covering up the scratch marks and other marks on his torso with seatbelt impressions. 'Just a little bit hurt'...my A...., that family is all nutso.